IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 14612 of 2008 Between: M/s. Lakshmi Gayathri Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Chikatigudem Village, Kethepally mandal, Nalgonda District 508213 rep by its Authorised representative Mr.T. Devender Reddy Director. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (CT) (LEgal), o/o the Commissioner of Commercial taxes, 2nd Floor, Nampally, Hyderabad 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Hydeabad Rural Division, Nampally Hyderabad. 3 The Commercial Tax Officer, 1-2-270/14/2, Kudakuda Road Suryapet, Nalgonda District .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus by setting a side the impugned proceedings order No. LIII(4)/407/2008, dt 14-05-2008 issued by the 1st respondent, as illegal unjustified and contrary to the provisions of law in the facts and circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.J.V.RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Division Bench of this Court made the following order: THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN *** WRIT PETITION No. 14612 OF 2008 ORAL ORDER : { Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari } Seeking a writ of mandamus, declaring the impugned proceedings dated 14-5-2008 passed by the first respondent in Order No. LIII(4)/407/2008 rejecting to grant stay of collection of the disputed Input Tax Credit of Rs.17,21,112- 00, penalty of Rs.4,29,406-00 and interest of Rs.26,272-00 as against Appellate Deputy Commissioner, (CTs), Hyderabad, in his Orders in AO.No.N/12/06-07/VAT, dated 23-10-2007, as illegal, unjustified and contrary to the provisions of law and consequently to direct the first respondent not to collect the disputed Input Tax Credit of Rs.17,21,112-00, Penalty of Rs.4,29,406-00 and Interest of Rs.26,272-00 pending appeal, the petitioner filed this writ petition. 2. The petitioner is a limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at Chikatigudem, Kothepalli Mandal, Nalgonda district and also a registered dealer on the rolls of the Commercial Tax Officer, Kudakuda Road, Suryapet. The petitioner was assessed for the period from December 2005 to July 2006 by the third respondent and was levied with the tax at a higher rate, denying the concessions claimed by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred appeal to the second respondent, which is pending. Pending appeal, the first respondent issued the impugned proceedings demanding payment of the disputed Input Tax Credit of Rs.17,21,112-00, penalty of Rs.4,29,406-00 and interest of Rs.26,272-00, as stated supra. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Heard Sri J.V. Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that pending an appeal, the issuance of impugned proceedings demanding to pay the disputed Input Tax Credit of Rs.17,21,112- 00, penalty of Rs.4,29,406-00 and interest of Rs.26,272-00 is contrary to law. 5. We have gone through the record. We feel that the interest of justice would have been met if stay was granted pending appeal, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing half of the disputed tax and 25% of the penalty and interest. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed at the stage of admission directing the petitioner to deposit 25% of the penalty and interest within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and in the meanwhile the respondents are directed not to take coercive steps for recovery of the same, pending appeal. The deposit of amount shall be without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner in appeal. If any amount has already been paid by the petitioner, the same shall be given credit. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs. ________________________ JUSTICE T . MEENA KUMARI , ______________________________ JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN, 09-7-2008 I s L ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}