IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 14312 of 2007 Between: Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, rep. by Chief General Manager (Telecom) A.P. Circle, Doorsanchar Bhavan, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad - 500 001. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Commissioner (CT) Government of Andhra Pradesh, Abids Division, 1st floor, Besides Hotel Sai Prakash, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 2 State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The commissioner of Commercial taxes Government of A.P., Hyderabad. 4 State Bank of India, rep. by the General Manager, BSNL, Wing, Accounts Division, Hyderabad. 5 ICICI Bank Limited, rep. by Head Corporation & Institutional Banking Division, ICICI Bank Tower, Level 1, West Wing, 1-11-256, Begumpet, Hyderabad 500 016. .....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 a writ, in the nature of a writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, direction or order declaring the notice dated 22.6.2007 issued by the 1st respondent and the consequential notices under Sec. 29 of the AP VAT Act bearing RC.No. C6/248/03, dated 28.6.2007 addressed to the General Manager, state Bank of India, BSNL Wing, Accounts Division and ICICI Bank Limited, Corporate Institutional Banking Division, Begumpet, Hyderabad, of the 1st respondent, as illegal and void and consequently direct the 1st respondent to refund the amount of Rs.14,52,29,260/- recovered from the petitioner's account in ICICI Bank Limited, Corporate Institutional Banking Division Begumpet, Hyderabad, with interest. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.R.S.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: MR. K. RAJI REDDY, SPL. STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX & MR. M. NARENDER REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 14312 of 2007 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the notice dated 22.6.2007 issued by the 1st respondent and consequential notices dated 28.6.2007 addressed to the General Manager, State Bank of India, BSNL Wing, Accounts Division & ICICI Bank Limited, Corporate Institutional Banking Division, Begumpet, Hyderabad, The main grievance of the petitioner is that challenging the assessment orders dated 20.8.2003 for the years 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002, the petitioner filed appeals before the Sales Tax Appellate tribunal and that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court, the respondents are not entitled to collect the sales tax on the telephone rentals realized by the petitioner and therefore, the levy of sales tax by the 1st respondent for the assessment years in question, cannot be enforced, even if no stay order is passed in the said appeals. But the 1st respondent issued notice dated 22.6.2007 demanding payment of tax for the above assessment years and also appropriated Rs.14,52,29,260/- unjustly from the ICICI Bank Limited, Corporate Institutional Bank Division, Begumpet, Hyderabad. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. Before going to deal with the case on hand, it is pertinent to note that on 5.7.2007, while admitting the writ petition, a Division Bench of this Court has passed the following order in WPMP No.17978 of 2007. “We are informed that appeals before the Tribunal are pending against the assessment orders. Learned Senior Counsel also submits that the assessment orders are contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bharath Sanchar Nigam Ltd., V. Union of India[1] and the appeals are pending before the tribunal. He contends that ex-facie the order of assessment is against the judgment of the Supreme Court and that order of assessment cannot be given effect to. Without commenting on the merits of the case, we feel that it would be proper to direct the Tribunal to dispose of the appeals expeditiously. We expect that the Tribunal would dispose of the appeals within one month. Till then, there shall be interim stay.” It is the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the appeals filed before the tribunal have been allowed and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for refund of amount that was recovered by the respondents-authorities. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that the appeals have already been allowed, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, We feel it just and proper to direct the petitioner to make a representation before the authorities concerned for refund of the amount, if so desires. On such representation, the authorities concerned shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ____________________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganathan Date: 9th June, 2008 Nn/gurc. THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 14312 of 2007 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 09.06.2008 [1] 145 STC 91