THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.NO.1573 OF 2010 01-02-2010 BETWEEN; M/s.Indus Towers Limited rep. by its Circle Finance Head, P.Ramakanth ...Petitioner vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Begumpet circle and others ...Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.NO.1573 OF 2010 ORAL ORDER: (Per RR,J) The petitioner is engaged in the business of providing infrastructur support to telecommunication operators and is a registered dealer unde the provisions of the C.S.T Act, 1956 on the rolls of the Commercial Ta Officer, Begumpet Circle, Hyderabad. The order impugned in this wr petition is the notice dated 23-12-2009, and the consequent ban attachment notice dated 22.01.2010, issued by the 1st respondent fo recovery of penalty of Rs.17,05,00,000/-. By his order dated 05-10-2009 the first respondent imposed penalt holding that the petitioner had misused the Form-C declaration unde Section 10(d) read with Section 10-A of CST Act. Aggrieved thereby th petitioner preferred an appeal before the 3rd respondent along with a sta application. By his order dated 30.11.2009 the 3rd respondent rejected sta petition filed by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the order of the 3rd responden rejecting stay, the petitioner preferred a revision before the 2nd responden It is not in dispute that the said revision petition filed before the 2n respondent is still pending. M/s Sri Lakshmi Kumaran and Sridharan Learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the revision petition i listed for hearing tomorrow and it was improper on the part of th respondents to attach the petitioner’s bank account in the interregnum. As the revision petition, seeking stay of collection of the disputed ta pending disposal of the appeal by the 3rd respondent, is pendin adjudication before the 2nd respondent we consider it appropriate to direc the respondents not to take any coercive steps for recovery of the dispute penalty till the revision petition pending before the 2nd respondent i disposed of and communicated to the petitioner herein. Consequently, th impugned attachment order is also set aside. The writ petition is disposed of as above at the stage of admission. N order as to costs. ______________ GODA RAGHURAM,J __________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J 1st FEBRUARY 2010. TSNR