IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 23337 of 2008 Between: M/s. Agro Tech Foods Limited, 31, S.D. Road, Secunderabad, Rep. by its Manager - Taxation, Smt. Priti Borkar. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Special Commodities Circle, Saroornagar Division, Hyderabad. 2 Assistant Commissioner (CT)-II, Saroornagar Division, Hyderabad. 3 Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. 4 Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), Hyderabad. .....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 or Order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus granting stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs. 23,43,690/- for the tax period from April, 2005 to March, 2007, arising in pursuance of the Appeal Order No. S/23/2007- 08-VAT, dated 27-09-2009 passed by the third respondent pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents.: SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 23337 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.23,43,690/- for the tax period, April, 2005 to March, 2007, pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. It is the case of the petitioner that against the orders passed by respondents 2 and 3, an appeal has been preferred before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending. The petitioner has already paid 50% of the disputed tax. Now, the steps are being taken for collection of the disputed tax and in such course, a notice has also been issued. Hence, the present writ petition has been ﬁled by the petitioner. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has ﬁled an appeal before the Tribunal and the same is pending and that the petitioner has already paid 50% of the disputed tax and at this juncture, the issuance of the notice by the 2nd respondent is illegal and arbitrary and in these circumstances, if the relief of stay is not granted and if the 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 Tribunal, 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 Tribunal, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, within a period of six weeks from today. 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 Ramesh Ranganathan Date: 24th October, 2008 Nn/Gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No:23337 OF 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 24/10/2008