IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 23409 of 2008 Between: M/s. Bhagya Lakshmi Extractions, Pulivenda Road, Kadapa, Kadapa District, A.P. Rep by its Managing Partner Smt. G. Bhagya Lakshmi. ..... PETITIONER A N D 1 The Commercial Tax Officer-I, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 2 The Additional Commissioner (C.T), (Legal), II Floor, C.T. Building, M.J. Road, Nampally, 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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the First Respondent in threatening to take coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax even though Appeal and Stay petition are pending are pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and Second Respondent respectively and consequently grant stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs. 1,93,750-00 for the Assessment Year 2002-2003 APGST pending disposal of the Appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, and pass such other suitable orders as this Court may deems fit and proper in the ci3rcumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Division Bench of this Court made the following : (Order follows 2nd page) THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 23409 of 2008 ORAL ORDER : (PER THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the ﬁrst respondent in threatening to take coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax when the appeal and stay application are pending consideration before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad and consequently to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.1,93,750-00 for the assessment year 2002-03 under APGST pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad and to pass such other suitable orders as this court may deems ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. It is stated that for the assessment year 2002- 03 the ﬁrst respondent had passed assessment order under the APGST Act, 1957 accepting the turn over as per the audit report ﬁled by the petitioner under Rule 17 (5) (A) of the APGST, 1957 vide order dated 27-3- 2004. Subsequently, the Dy.Commissioner (CT) Kadapa in exercise of his powers under section 14 (4) of the APGTST Act 1957 passed re-assessment order dated 19- 3-2008 imposing additional tax. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred appeal and stay application before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad on 17-10-2008 with a delay of 18 days and the same is pending consideration. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though several contentions were raised before the respondent authorities but the respondent authorities are likely to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax before consideration of the appeal and stay application by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission directing the petitioner to deposit half of the disputed tax amount, as per the impugned order, within a period of eight weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive step for recovery of the tax, pending ﬁnalisation of the appeal by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. It is made clear that the amount paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. 6. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI. _________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH. 29-X-2008. I s L NB: Furnish CC of this order tomorrow. // BY ORDER // I s L .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}