THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.8109 and 8117 of 2010 March 09, 2011 Between: M/s.TATA Consultancy Services Limited , represented by its Manager, Mr.T.V.Rama Krishna … Petitioner And The Assistant Commissioner (CT) VMU-I, Hyderabad (Rural) division, Hyderabad And others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.8109 and 8117 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) Both these writ petitions are by the very same dealer. The first arises under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (the CST Act), and the latter under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (the VAT Act). It would suffice, for disposal of both these writ petitions, if the facts in W.P.No.8109 of 2010 are briefly noted. The petitioner is a registered dealer on the rolls of the third respondent both under the CST Act and the VAT Act. It is engaged in the business of IT related services, namely, management, development and maintenance contracts for software, annual technical support, digital signature certificates etc. For the tax period April, 2008 to March, 2009 under the CST Act, the first respondent conducted an audit and, thereafter, a notice was issued proposing to levy tax. The petitioner submitted their reply on 18.2.2010, but the levy was confirmed by the first respondent by order dated 24.2.2010. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner preferred an appeal to the second respondent on 17.3.2010. As the stay application, filed along with the appeal, was rejected they invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by way of these two writ petitions. This court passed an interim order granting stay of all further proceedings pending appeal on condition of the petitioner depositing 1/3rd of the demanded tax including the amount already paid as pre-deposit. Since the substantive appeal is still pending adjudication before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, we see no reason to examine the contentions urged in these two writ petitions on merits. As Sri S.Dwarakanath, learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner has already complied with the interim order of this Court, and has deposited 1/3rd of the demanded tax less the amount paid towards pre-deposit, we deem it proper to observe that the interim order passed by this Court earlier shall continue till the main appeal itself is disposed of by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner. The second respondent shall dispose of the appeals at the earliest and, in any event, not later than two months from today. The writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) ______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) March 09, 2011 YS