THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.NO.21112 OF 2009 09-10-2009 BETWEEN; M/s A.R.Enterprises, 58/3, Guntur, rep. By its Accountant and Authorized Signatory D.Nagarajuna ...Petitioner vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, Mangalagiri Circle and two others ...Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.NO.21112 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER: (Per RR,J) The petitioner herein questions the order passed by the 3r respondent dated 26-05-2009 whereby its application for stay, pendin disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (STAT Additional Bench, Visakhapatnam, was dismissed by the 3rd respondent. The petitioner, a partnership concern carrying on business in packin material, is a dealer under the A.P.G.S.T Act ( for short “the Act”). For th assessment year 2004-05, the 1st respondent by order dated 24-02-200 levied tax at 4% on the first sale of plastic gunnies, which the petitione claims to be pouches, under item 19 of the First Schedule to the Ac treating it as packing material. The 2nd respondent, in exercise of hi revisional powers under Section 20(2) of the Act, proposed to revise th assessment charging the petitioner to tax under Entry 187 of the Firs Schedule treating the goods as ‘articles of plastic’. After the petitioner file its objections, the said proposal was confirmed by order date 20.12.2007. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal to th STAT on 23-02-2008 which is said to be pending. The application filed before the 3rd respondent, seeking stay o collection of the disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal before th Tribunal, was rejected by order dated 26-05-2009 on the ground that th petitioner had purchased reels of plastic film from outside the Stat dealers, had printed the information furnished by the customers and ha sold the printed material either in the form of plain reels or flat tubes; tha these printed plastic material, in plain reels or flat tubes, do not fall in an of the four sub-items under item 19 and as such fall within item 187 of th Ist Schedule to the APGST Act as “articles of plastic”. Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner, woul submit that, under Entry 19 (Clause. iv), packing material, of all types o containers, when sold without its contents is exigeble to 4%. Learne counsel would submit that the petitioner manufactures plastic pouche which are containers under Entry 19(iv)(a) of the Ist Schedule to th APGST Act, 1957. The petitioner has an arguable case before the Tribunal on th question as to whether the goods, in which they carry on business, fa under Entry-19 or 187 of the Ist Schedule. We consider it appropriate therefore, to direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps fo recovery of the disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal before th STAT on condition that the petitioner deposits 50% of the disputed ta within a period of four(4) weeks from today. The amount, if any, alread paid by the petitioner shall be taken into credit. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. ______________ GODA RAGHURAM,J __________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J 9th OCTOBER 2009. Note: Issue CC by Monday. (B/O) TSNR