IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 3303 of 2010 Between: M/s. Wockhardt Hospitals Limited, Regd. Office at Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai rep., by its Deputy General Manager (Finance). ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Narayanaguda Circle, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 3303 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 31.12.2009 passed by the 3rd respondent in CCT’s Ref.No.LV(1)/645/2009-I, and seeking a direction to restrain the authorities from taking any coercive steps for collection of the disputed tax for the assessment year 2006- 07, pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent. The case of the petitioner is that questioning the assessment proceedings of the 1st respondent, it had preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent and the same is pending and along with the appeal, it had also filed an application seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax pending adjudication of the appeal but the 2nd respondent dismissed the said application vide the order impugned herein. Now, the authorities are threatening to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending before the 2nd respondent and that consequent to the order impugned herein, the authorities are insisting for payment of the disputed tax and if the stay is not granted and the entire disputed tax is recovered, the very purpose of filing the appeal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending before the 2nd respondent, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we feel it a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the disputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, on or before 31st March, 2010. However, it is made clear that the amount paid if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao Date: 3rd March, 2010 nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 3303 of 2010 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 03/03/2010