THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.12987 of 2006 March 15, 2011 Between: M/s.Anisetty Adeiah Naidu, Palakol, Represented by its Proprietor, Sri Anisetty Adeiah Naidu … Petitioner And Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Legal), Nampally, Hyderabad And others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.12987 of 2006 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The petitioner, a works contractor, is a dealer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (the APGST Act) on the rolls of the third respondent. For the assessment year 2000-2001, the third respondent completed the assessment and passed orders on 14.8.2003. The second respondent, however, revised the order. Against the said order dated 22.2.2006, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (STAT). Pending such appeal, he moved an application under Section 21(6) of the APGST Act seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax. The said authority, while referring to the observations made by this Court in W.P.No.3136 of 2006 (M/s.Unity Constructions Pvt. Ltd., case), rejected stay aggrieved by which the present writ petition is filed. This Court, while admitting the writ petition, stayed collection of the disputed tax of ` 81,021/-. The respondents have not filed any counter affidavit. Therefore we deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition instead of keeping the matter pending, as the appeal itself is pending before the STAT. This Court heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes. The third respondent, while refusing stay, has referred to the observations of this Court in M/s.Unity Constructions Pvt. Ltd., wherein it was held that, only in the rarest of rare cases, the Court would be inclined to entertain the prayer for interim stay in matters involving challenge to the order passed by the competent authority for levy and/or recovery of tax. After giving due consideration, we see no reason to disagree with the order impugned in the writ petition. However, the matter has been kept pending for the last four years. Further, under Section 21 (1)(b) of the APGST Act, an appeal is provided against the order of the Deputy Commissioner passed under Section 20(2) of the APGST Act. By reason of the amendment made by A.P. Act No.3/2002, with effect from 30.11.2001, an appeal against the said order shall be accompanied by satisfactory proof of payment of 25% difference of tax ordered by revisional authority under Section 20(2) of the APGST Act. Though the said provision is not applicable to the present case which pertains to the assessment year 2000-2001, we deem it proper to adopt the same principle in this matter also. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that, pending appeal before the STAT, the order of stay granted by this Court shall continue on condition of the petitioner depositing a sum of ` 25,000/- within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, we also direct the STAT to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) ______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) March 15, 2011 NOTE: Dispatch order copy by 17.3.2011. (By order) YS