IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 3721 of 2008 Between: M/s CMC limited, Post Box No.304,4-3-596/A, Posnett Bhavan, Tilak Road, Ramkote, Hyderabad-500 001, Rep by its Manager(Finance & Accounts) Mr.Ilangovan, ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Abids Circle, Hyderabad 2 The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Abids Circle, Hyderabad 3 The Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction quashing the order of the 3rd Respondent in CCT's Ref. No.LV(1)/08/2008, dated 28/1/2008 as illegal, arbitrary and unjustified and consequently restrain the 1st Respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax of Rs.78,02,2922/- out of total disputed tax of Rs.85,11,592/- for the assessment year 2001-2002 pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.DWARAKANATH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER(Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the notice dated 28.01.2008 issued by the 3rd respondent demanding payment of the balance disputed tax of Rs.78,02,292/- and consequently, to restrain the 1st respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax for the assessment year 2001-2002 under the APGST Act, 1957, pending disposal of the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The main grievance of the petitioner is that aggrieved by the assessment order passed by the 1st respondent, an appeal has been preferred before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, which was allowed by order dated 25.6.2007. Consequent thereupon, the second respondent revised the order, dated 10.11.2003 and passed a revised order dated 19.11.2007 and a consequential order dated 21.11.2007 came to be passed by the first respondent raising the demand. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, complying with the condition of depositing 25% of the disputed tax. The stay application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the third respondent and consequent to the dismissal of the stay petition, the first respondent issued the notice dated 18.2.2008 seeking payment of the balance disputed tax. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned 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 pending appeal, the petitioner has already paid 25% of the disputed tax for maintainability of the appeal, but the 1st respondent is trying to take coercive steps against the petitioner for recovery of the balance disputed tax. . The fact that remains is that the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is pending. But, during the pendency of the same, the 1st respondent is trying to take coercive steps against the petitioner for recovery of the disputed tax. It is the case of the petitioner that they have paid Rs.3,62,000/- towards 25% of the disputed tax at the time of preferring the appeal against reassessment order and also paid further amount of Rs.3,47,300/- and at this juncture, if the relief as to the stay of the proceedings is not entertained and if the recovery of the disputed tax in question is effected during the pendency of the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, the very purpose of filing the said appeal, which is a statutory remedy that is available to the aggrieved party, would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the pendency of the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we feel, it is a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to imposition of certain conditions so as to infer bonafides of the petitioner in prosecuting the appeal. Accordingly, there shall be stay of demand notice dated 28.01.2008 till the disposal of the appeal pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing one third (1/3rd) of the disputed tax within a period of four 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. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. _____________________ Dr.G.YETHIRAJULU, J. February 22, 2008 Copy in three days. //BO// MAS ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Abids Circle, Hyderabad 2 The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Abids Circle, Hyderabad 3 The Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad 4. 2CD copies