IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 24495 of 2008 Between: M/s. The Chodavaram Co-operative Sugars Limited, No.B.1109, Govada - 531 023, Visakhapatnam District, rep. by its Managing Director, Mr.G.V.Ramaiah. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Visakhapatnam. .....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 issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction restraining the 1st Respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of disputed tax of Rs.95,00,361/- for the assessment year 2004-05 (APGST) pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench at Visakhapatnam, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.DWARAKANATH Counsel for the Respondents : SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 24495 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax for the assessment year 2004-05 pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Visakhapatnam. It is the case of the petitioner that aggrieved by the assessment order of the 1st respondent, an appeal and a stay petition were ﬁled before the 2nd respondent. But the 2nd respondent dismissed the appeal. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench at Visakhapatnam and the same is pending. At this stage, the 1st respondent is insisting for payment of the disputed tax. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 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 the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending and now, the 1st respondent is insisting for payment of the disputed tax and in these circumstances, if the stay is not granted and if the disputed tax is recovered, the very purpose of ﬁling the appeal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is 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 appeal before the Tribunal, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, 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 Ramesh Ranganathan Date: 10th November, 2008 Nn/gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 24495 of 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 10/11/2008