THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.14122 of 2009 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) Heard Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Balaji Varma, Learned Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax. At their request the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. The petitioner is a proprietary concern carrying on business in the execution of works contracts. For the year 2003-2004, the second respondent passed assessment order dated 23.01.2004. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Secunderabad Division. The Deputy Commissioner rejected the appeal on the ground that the petitioner had not paid 12.5% of the disputed tax as pre- deposit. Consequent thereto the assessment order, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, attained finality. While matters stood thus, the Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Tax), Secunderabad, in exercise of the powers conferred on him under Section 20(2) of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act (for short ‘the Act’), issued show cause notice dated 29.01.2008 and, thereafter, passed an order in Revision on 10.12.2008, a copy of which the petitioner claims to have received only on 28.04.2010. Aggrieved by the order in Revision, the petitioner filed an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad under Section 21 of the Act on 29.04.2010. The petitioner also filed an application for stay before the first respondent seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.5,48,787/-. It is the petitioner’s case that the order dated 19.05.2010 passed by the first respondent, rejecting the stay application, is erroneous and necessitates being set aside. While several contentions are urged by Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, on the merits of the orders under Revision, we consider it wholly inappropriate to examine the said contentions urged before this Court on merits as the substantive appeal is pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, which has jurisdiction to examine both questions of fact and law. We consider it appropriate, in such circumstances, to direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps for recovery of the tax due from the petitioner, pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, on condition that the petitioner deposits 50% of the disputed tax within a period of six weeks from today. The amount, if any, already paid towards the disputed tax shall be given credit to. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. In the circumstances without costs. _________________________ JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO ________________________________ JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN 23rd June 2010 dr