IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 19522 of 2008 Between: M/s. Reckitt Benckiser ( India) Limited, A Company Incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having it's registered office at 227, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase III Okhla, New Delhi - 110 020 and its Regional Office at Mahalakshmi Chambers, 29, MG Road, Bangalore -560 001 rep. by Mr. Ramasubramanian, Commercial Manager,S.R. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Bowenpally Circle, Pavani Prestige, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 2 Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, O/o. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Nampally, hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ, order or direction, more appropriately a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the Respondent No.1 in initiating recovery proceedings vide notice dated 25-07-2008 against the Petitioner for recovery of 50% of the balance disputed tax amounting to Rs. 56,58,400/- as discriminatory, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of India and consequently interdict the respondents from recovering the 50% balance disputed tax amounting of Rs. 56,58,400/- pending disposal of the appeal before the Hon'ble A.P. Sales Tax Appelate Tribunal bearing A.R.No. 639 of 2008 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.PRIYADARSHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 19522 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: (per T HE HON’BLE MRS. JUST ICE T .MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings against the petitioner for recovery of 50% of the balance disputed tax amount to Rs.56,58,400/- as illegal, arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents not to recover 50% of balance disputed tax pending disposal of appeal before A.P. Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, the present writ petition is filed. The petitioner is a Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act and engaged in the manufacture, sale and marketing of various household products including insecticides. According to the petitioner, the 1 st respondent erroneously assessed the petitioner under the APVAT Act, 2005 and passed assessment order for the year 2007-2008 demanding tax of Rs.1,13,16,799/-. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner ﬁled an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner which were also dismissed. According to the petitioner, aggrieved by the orders of the Appellate authority, it had preferred a further appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and had also deposited 50% of the disputed tax. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are taking steps for recovery of the balance 50% of the disputed tax even though the appeal is still pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that recovery of balance 50% of the disputed tax when the appeal is still pending before the STAT and the petitioner has already paid 50% of the disputed tax, is contrary to law. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. 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 stay of payment of the disputed tax pending ﬁnalization of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 50% of the disputed tax 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 Appellate Authority. It is made clear that the amount paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. ____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. Dated:08.09.2008 GS/ASP