THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.No.28449 OF 2007 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) The petitioner, a public sector oil marketing company engaged in the business of oil refining, was assessed to tax by the 1st respondent by his order dated 31.3.2003. Subsequently an order of reassessment was passed on 6.8.2004 for the assessment year 1999-2000 both under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (APGST Act) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (CST Act) and the total tax levied additionally was Rs.4.40 Crores and Rs.7.51 Crores respectively. Penalty proposals were also initiated by the 1st respondent. Against the re-assessment order, and the order imposing penalty, the petitioner preferred appeals before the 2nd respondent which were dismissed by order dated 30.9.2004. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner carried the matter in appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (STAT) before whom the appeal is still pending. Against the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, rejecting the stay petition, the petitioner filed a revision before the 3rd respondent who, by his order dated 23.11.2007, dismissed the petitioner’s application and refused to grant stay of collection of tax and the penalty. Aggrieved by the order of the 3rd respondent the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court. This Court, by order dated 31.12.2007, granted interim stay. Sri S.Dwaraknath, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the very same issue, which arises for consideration in the appeal before the STAT, was held in favour of the petitioner – assessee by the STAT itself in T.A.No.962 of 2005 and T.A.No.103 of 2006 for the assessment year 1997-98 against both the orders of tax and penalty, and the STAT had held in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Aggrieved thereby the matter was carried in revision to this Court by the revenue in T.R.C.Nos.6 and 7 of 2007. A Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 18.7.2007, dismissed the revisions confirming the order of the STAT. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the appeal before the STAT has been taken up for hearing, and the matter has been adjourned to 19.4.2011 to enable the state representative to put forth his submissions. In the light of the facts narrated hereinabove, more so as it is the petitioner’s case that a similar question has already decided in their favour both by the STAT and this Court, we consider it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition requesting the Tribunal to dispose of the appeals pending before it within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The interim order passed by this Court on 31.12.2007 shall continue until final orders are passed by the STAT in the appeals pending before it. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits, and the STAT shall adjudicate the appeal uninfluenced by any observations made in this order. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. _____________ V.V.S.RAO, J ___________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J 06.04.2011 asp