IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH 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 : 19276 of 2008 Between: M/s. Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Agencies, Macherla, rep. by its Proprietor M.Srinivasa Rao S/o. Sriramamurthy Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Office of Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Commercial Taxes Complex, M.J. Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner (CT) Guntur-II Division, Guntur. 3 The Commercial Tax Officer, Macherla, Guntur District. .....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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in rejecting the stay petition ﬁled seeking stay of the disputed tax of Rs.2,58,709/- for the assessment year 2004-05 pending appeal before Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam by its order dated 15.07.2008 in CCT's Ref.No.LV(4)/477/2008 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper and contrary to the judgment of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal delivered in T.A.No.816/05 and Batch dated 17.10.07 which is binding on the 1st Respondent as per the Full Bench Judgment of this Hon'ble Court reported in 136 STC P.586 and consequently forbear the 3rd respondent from taking any coercive steps pending disposal of the appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Guntur and grant such other relief or reliefs. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.J.K.KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.RAJI REDDY(SPL.SC FOR CT) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 19276 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: (per T HE HON’BLE MRS. JUST ICE T .MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring order dated 15.07.2008 passed by the ﬁrst respondent rejecting to stay the collection of disputed tax of Rs.2,58,709/- as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P.G.S.T. Act, 1957 and consequently, direct the respondents not to collect the disputed tax for the year 2004-05, pending appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, the petitioner ﬁled this writ petition. The petitioner is an assessee on the rolls of the third respondent. The third respondent passed assessment order for the year 2004-2005 by proceedings, dated 12.12.2005. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner ﬁled an appeal before the second respondent along with a stay application and the said appeal was dismissed. Challenging the same, the petitioner ﬁled a further appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and stay application before the 1st respondent pending seeking stay of collection of disputed tax of Rs.2,58,709/- and the same was dismissed by the 1st respondent by his order dated 15.07.2008. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that though several contentions were raised before the ﬁrst respondent, the ﬁrst respondent has refused to grant stay vide the order impugned herein. It is submitted that pursuant to the rejection of stay by the ﬁrst respondent, the third respondent is contemplating to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. In the 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 to deposit half of the disputed tax amount, as per the impugned order, within a period of eight weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive step for recovery of the tax, pending ﬁnalisation of the appeal by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. It is made clear that the amount paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. ____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. Dated:08.09.2008 GS/ASP