IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 20151 of 2008 Between: M/s. Lakshmi Motors Plot No.319 Autonagar Guntur Rep.by its Managing Director Mr P.Rajesh ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Commissioner(CT) VMU-II Guntur Division Guntur 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner(CT) Guntur Division Guntur .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 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 1,93,681- for the tax periods 2005 to 2006 to 2007 to to 2008 under the APVAT act pursuant to order of the 2nd respondent dt 30-7-2008 pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Additional Bench at Visakhapatnam and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 20151 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) The petitioner has prayed in the petition that during the pendency of the appeal, the amount of tax which is in dispute may not be recovered by use of coercive methods. During the pendency of the writ petition, this court had granted interim relief whereby the respondents have been restrained from recovering the amount, which is in dispute. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that out of Rs.1,93,681/-, the amount of tax payable by the petitioner, Rs.1,00,000/- have already been paid and thus it has been submitted that substantial amount has been paid by the petitioner during the pendency of the petition. In view of the fact that substantial amount has already been paid, as admitted by the learned standing counsel for the respondents, in our opinion, the interim relief which has been granted by this court is just and proper. In the circumstances, the interim relief which has been granted earlier is confirmed. We hope that the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam would dispose of the appeal as soon as possible in accordance with law. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. ___________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 23rd April, 2009 asp