HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:2154 OF 2008 Dated:7.2.2008 Between: M/s Sri Maruthi Constructions, Works Contractors, Kothagudem, Khammam District, rep., by its Partner V. Bala Prasad. ..Petitioner And 1. The Commercial Tax Officer, Kothagudem Circle, Khammam District and others. ..Respondents. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:2154 OF 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the orders of the 3rd respondent in CCT’s Ref.No.LIII (1)833/2007, dated 8.1.2008 for the years 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001- 02 and 2002-03 and consequently to restrain the 1st respondent from taking any coercive steps for collection of the disputed taxes for the assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03, pending disposal of the appeals before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad. The main grievance of the petitioner is that aggrieved by the orders of the 2nd respondent for the years 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001- 02 & 2002-03, the petitioner preferred appeals before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner filed applications before the 3rd respondent seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax pending disposal of the appeals. But, the 3rd respondent rejected the stay petitions. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner. 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 against the orders of the 2nd respondent, appeals are pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and that the petitioner has already paid Rs.8,64,700/- of the disputed tax for all the assessment years and therefore, the 3rd respondent is not justified in rejecting the stay applications at this stage. It is further contended that taking advantage of the rejection of stay, the authorities are insisting for payment of the disputed tax and at this juncture, if the relief of stay is not entertained and if the disputed tax is recovered, the very purpose of filing the appeal before Tribunal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeals are pending before the Tribunal, 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 tax pending disposal of the appeals before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax of each assessment year, within a period of six 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 G. Rohini Date: 7th February, 2008 Nn/Gurc. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:2154 OF 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 07/02/2008