IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 19770 of 2008 Between: M/s. Unitech NCC (JV), 41, Nagarjuna Hills, Punjagutta, Hyderabad, represented by its General Manager (F&A), Sri.K.Vidya Sagar. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Srinagar Colony Circle, Hyderabad. 2 Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal) (FAC) Andhra Pradesh, 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.1,15,43,125/- for the assessment year 2004-05 (APGST) arising in pursuance of the stay rejection orders passed by the third respondent in CCT's Ref. No. LIII (4)/538/2008, dated 29.07.2008 pending disposal of the appeal before the second respondent or to pass such further or other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Division Bench of this Court made the following order:(contd. 2nd Page) THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI A N D THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO. 1 9 7 7 0 OF 2008 ORAL ORDER : {Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a writ of mandamus granting stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.1,15,43,125-00 for the assessment year 2004-05 (APGST) arising out of the rejection order passed by the third respondent dated 29-7-2008 in CCT’s Ref.No. LIII (4)/538/2008 and to pass such other suitable orders as the Division Bench of this Court may deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Joint Venture Company engaged in the business of execution of works contract and is an assessee on the rolls of the ﬁrst respondent. By proceedings dated 31-3-2008, the petitioner company was assessed for the year 2004-05 under APGST on a gross and net turn over of Rs.25,89,66,358-00 and Rs.14,42,89,067-00 respectively. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner ﬁled an appeal before the second respondent along with stay application, seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.1,15,43,125-00. By proceedings dated 10-6- 2008, the second respondent rejected stay application. Assailing the same, the petitioner ﬁled a revision before the third respondent seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.1,15,43,125-00 pending disposal of the appeal before the second respondent. The third respondent passed proceedings in CCT’s Ref.No.LIII (4)/538/2008, dated 29-7- 2008 rejected stay application. In pursuance of the proceedings passed by the third respondent in CCT’s Ref.No.LIII (4)/538/2008, dated 29-7-2008, the ﬁrst respondent issued notice dated 13-8-2008 directing the petitioner company to pay the arrears within a week from the date of receipt of notice, failing which coercive steps would be initiated to recover the arrears without any further notice. 3. It is submitted by Sri S. Krishna Murthy, the learned counsel representing the petitioner-company that though several contentions were raised before the respondents, the respondents have refused to grant stay vide the orders impugned herein. The grounds raised in this writ petition may be considered to meet the ends of justice. It is submitted that pursuant to the rejection of stay by the third respondent, the ﬁrst respondent is contemplating to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. 5. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission directing the petitioner-company, M/s. Unitech NCC (JV), Nagarjuna Hills, Panjagutta, Hyderabad, represented by its General Manager (F & A), Mr. K.Vidyasagar to deposit half of the due tax amount, as per the impugned order, within a period of four weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive step for recovery of the disputed tax, pending ﬁnalisation of the appeal by the Appellate Authority. The appellate authority, i.e., the third respondent is directed to dispose of the revision ﬁled by the petitioner-company as expeditiously as possible, on merits and in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already disposed of. It is made clear that the amount paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. 6. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. ____________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J. _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 11-09-2008. I s L NB: *MOST URGENT/TOP PRIORITY: (1) Operative Portion of the order by wire at party’s costs. (2) Furnish CC of the order positively within three days. // BY ORDER // I s L ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}