IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.28147 of 2008 Between: M/s. Visaka Industries Limited "Visaka Towers" 1-8-303/69/3, S.P. Road, Secunderabad-500 003, Rep. by its President (Corporate) and Company Secretary, Mr. K.V. Soorianarayana ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (LTU) Begumpet Division, Hyderabad. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 The Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in directing deposit of 50% of the disputed tax for grant of stay of recovery of the disputed tax pending appeal before the 2nd respondent inspite of the fact that the petitioner has filed declarations in Form -C & F covering the entire disputed turnover through the proceedings dt. 25-11-2008 as illegal, arbitrary and high- handed and set aside the same and consequently restrain the 1st respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disptued tax of Rs. 99,02,608/- from out of the total disputed tax of Rs. 1,13,17,266/- pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent for the assessment year 2007-2008 under the CST Act. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.BHASKAR REDDY VEMIREDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.28147 of 2008 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes for the respondents. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the APVAT Act, 2005 and CST Act, 1956 and an assessee on the rolls of the 1st respondent. For the assessment year 2007-08, the petitioner having effected certain inter-State sales to registered dealers in other States against declarations furnished in Form-C has collected tax @ 3% and remitted the same to the department and also claimed to have effected certain stock transfers to its branches in other States claiming exemption under Section 6-A of the CST Act, 1956. According to the petitioner, the 1st respondent finalized the assessment proceedings, dated 15-09-2008, under the provisions of CST Act, 1956, levying a higher rate of tax on the inter State sales turnover of Asbestos Sheets treating stock transfers as inter-state sales on the ground that the petitioner could not file the declarations in Forms C and F, while rejecting the request for further time for filing the declarations, though under Rule 12(7) of the CST (RT) Rules, the 1st respondent could extend time for filing the declarations. The petitioner is aggrieved that the assessing authority declined to grant further time for filing the declarations. Against the assessment order of the 1st respondent, dated 15- 09-2008, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the 2nd respondent along with an application for grant of stay. The 2nd respondent having dismissed the application for grant of stay, by the proceedings, dated 30- 10-2008, the petitioner preferred a revision to the 3rd respondent and filed before the 3rd respondent the declarations in Forms C and F covering the entire disputed turnover and requested for stay pending the appeal. The 3rd respondent by an order, dated 25-11-2008, granted stay subject to the condition that the petitioner-company pays 50% of the balance of the disputed tax within four weeks from the date of the order. The petitioner claims to have paid Rs.5,00,000/- pursuant to the conditional order, dated 25-11-2008 of the 3rd respondent on 23-12- 2008, but failed to pay the balance due as per the conditional order on account of financial constraints and beseeched the 3rd respondent for extension of time. The 3rd respondent has not responded to the application of the petitioner for grant of extension of time and a garnishee order is stated to have been issued by the 1st respondent on account of the failure of the petitioner to deposit 50% of the tax liability in terms of the conditional order passed by the 3rd respondent on 25-11- 2008. In these circumstances, the petitioner is before this court. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this court considers it appropriate to grant extension of time for a period of four weeks from today to enable the petitioner to pay the balance due of the 50% of the disputed tax, as ordered by the 3rd respondent in the proceedings, dated 25-11-2008, after taking credit for the amounts already paid pursuant to the said order of the 3rd respondent. The writ petition is disposed of as above at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J __________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 29-12-2008 Note: Issue C.C. in three days (B/o) Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}