IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITIONS NO : 28476, 28477, 28478, 28479, 28480, 28481, 28482 & 28483 of 2009 Between: M/s. Infotech Enterprises Limited, Plot No.11, Software Links Layout, Infocity, Madhapur, Hyderabad, rep., by its Chairman and Managing Director B.V.R. Mohan Reddy. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Srinagar Colony Circle, Punjagutta Division, Mayur Kushal Complex, Abids, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITIONS NO : 28476, 28477, 28478, 28479, 28480, 28481, 28482 & 28483 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) These writ petitions are filed challenging the orders dated 11.12.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent refusing to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax pending disposal of the appeals before the 3rd respondent. Since the parties and the issue involved in these writ petitions are common, all these writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order. The case of the writ petitioner is that aggrieved by the orders passed by the 1st respondent for the tax period 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 (April –June), it had preferred appeals before the 3rd respondent and the same are pending. Along with the appeals, the petitioner filed applications seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax, but the said applications were rejected and hence, the petitioner preferred revisions before the 2nd respondent, but the 2nd respondent also refused to grant stay. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petitions. On 31.12.2009, a Division Bench of this Court passed the following order: “Notice before admission. List on 19.1.2010. Meanwhile, the respondents are directed not to initiate any coercive steps for recovery of the tax liability under the CST Act 1956 and AP VAT Act, 2005 for the assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-2010 on condition that the petitioner deposits 1/3rd of the liability under the respective Acts as determined and the determination pending consideration in the appeals preferred to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, within a period of four weeks from today. In default of such deposit within the period stipulated herein, the stay granted herein shall stand dissolved on the occurrence of the default and the respondents would be at liberty to collect the entire liability, in accordance with law. In determining the amount of deposit of 1/3rd as directed above, the petitioner may deduct the amount already deposited.” When these matters were taken up, Sri T. Vinod Kumar, Counsel representing Sri R. Raghunandan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the conditions imposed by this Court while passing the order dated 31.12.2009 had been complied with and as the matters relate to stay pending appeals, the stay may be extended till disposal of the appeals before the 3rd respondent and except that, no further orders are necessary in these writ petitions. Recording the above submission, these writ petitions are disposed of. However, the stay granted by this Court on 31.12.2009 shall remain operative pending disposal of the appeals before the 3rd respondent. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _____________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao Date: 23rd March, 2010 nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITIONS NO : 28476, 28477, 28478, 28479, 28480, 28481, 28482 & 28483 of 2009 (Common Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 23/03/2010