IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17516 of 2008 Between: M/s. Jay Ambe Enterprises, Plot No.7-2-B12, Industrial Estate, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500 018, rep. by its Partner, Mr. Maruswamy Madhu. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. 2 The Dy. Commercial Tax Officer, IDA, Gandhinagar Circle, 2nd Floor, Gagan Vihar, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Commercial Tax Officer, Fathenagar Circle, 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 will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the stay application by proceedings dated 06.08.2008 without considering the contentions of the petitioner much less not even referring them in the order as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the act and in violation of principles of natural justice and Rule of Law and the assessment proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 25.04.2008 passed under Rule 59 of AP VAT Rules in ultra vires to Section 2(4) of the AP VAT Act and consequently set aside the same as null and void and grant stay of collection of disputed demand of Rs.4,54,907/- for the period 1-6-2006 to 31-3-2007, pending disposal of the appeal before the 1st respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondents.: SRI A.V. KRISHNA KOUNDINYA, SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : . THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V. SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17516 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the stay application by proceedings, dated 6.8.2008, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently, to set aside the same and grant stay of collection of the disputed demand for the period 1.6.2006 to 31.3.2007, pending disposal of the appeal before the 1st respondent. The main grievance of the petitioner is that against the assessment proceedings of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent and along with the appeal, an application seeking stay of collection of the disputed demand, was filed. But the 1st respondent rejected the stay application. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent challenging the assessment proceedings of the 2nd respondent and the same is pending and that the application seeking stay of recovery of the tax was also rejected and that the petitioner has already paid 12.5% of the disputed demand and in these circumstances, if the relief of stay is not granted and if the disputed demand is recovered, the very purpose of filing the appeal before 1st respondent would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending before the 1st respondent, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, We feel it a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the disputed demand for the period in question, pending disposal of the appeal before the 1st respondent, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed demand, within a period of eight weeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amount paid if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________________ Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar Date: 12th August, 2008 NOTE: Communicate by wire at party’s costs (BO) nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V. SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17516 of 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 12/08/2008