THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.22260 of 2009 Date: 15.10.2009 Between: M/s. Satyam Computer Services Limited. … Petitioner and The Commercial Tax Officer, Begumpet Circle, Hydeabad and two others. … Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.22260 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) The order under challenge in this writ petition is the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner rejecting stay pending disposal of the appeal pending before him and the consequential demand notice directing payment of tax. The petitioner is carrying on business in providing of Information Technology Services. He is also a registered dealer under the provisions of A.P VAT Act and CST Act. The case of the petitioner is that for the previous assessment years 2002-03, the appellate authority on the very same issues had set aside the order of the assessing authority and remanded the matter back for fresh consideration and that the assessing authority had for the said assessment year held that no tax was liable to be paid and that for the assessment year now in question (2007-2008), the very same assessing authority has taken a different view and has sought to levy tax on matters which do not fall within the purview of the A.P. VAT Act. Sri V. Bhaskar Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner would contend that, since no tax can be levied on the Information Technology Services which do not constitute sale of goods, no tax could have been levied thereupon. Against the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner rejecting stay, the petitioner has preferred revision which is said to be still pending. As the petitioner has already availed the remedy of revision before the third respondent, we see no reason to entertain the writ petition on merits. Suffice to hold that, since the revision petition is pending before the third respondent, the first respondent shall not take any coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax pending disposal of the revision by the third respondent and communication of the order therein to the petitioner. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of at the admission stage. However in the circumstances without costs. _____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Date: 15.10.2009 ____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Note: Issue C.C. by 19.10.2009 B/o MRKR/ASP