IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 12365 of 2010 Dated: 2.6.2010 Between: M/s. Bharti Telemedia Limited, rep., by its Deputy General Manager, Legal. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Assistant Commissioner (CT) VM-II, Begumpet Division, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 12365 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the order dated 18.5.2010 passed by the 3rd respondent and the consequential notice dated 24.5.2010 issued by the 2nd respondent, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the respondents not to collect the disputed tax. The case of the petitioner is that aggrieved by the assessment order dated 15.3.2010, it has preferred an appeal before the 3rd respondent-Appellate Deputy Commissioner. Along with the appeal, the petitioner also filed a stay application, but the 3rd respondent rejected the same. Hence, the petitioner filed a revision before the Additional Commissioner (Legal) and the same is pending. While so, the 2nd respondent issued a notice demanding 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 appeal filed by the petitioner is pending before the 3rd respondent and that the revision filed by the petitioner against the stay rejection order is also pending and at this stage, the 2nd respondent issued a notice demanding payment of the disputed tax and in these circumstances, if the stay is not granted and 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, 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 3rd respondent, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, within a period of eight 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 Nooty Ramamohana Rao Date: 2nd June, 2010 nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO :12365 of 2010 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 02/06/2010