IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 87 of 2009 Between: M/s.TATA Consultancy Services Limited, 1 Software Units Layout,Hyderabad-500081, rep by its Senior manager-Finance Mr.A.Srinivasa Murthy ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax officer, Madhapur circle Hyderabad 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner(CT), Hyderabad Rural Divison, 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 of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction setting aside the notice dated 20.12.2008 issued by the 1st respondent demanding payment of Rs.7,49,718/- as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to law and consequently restrain the 1st respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the disputes tax of Rs.82,42,866/- for the period April 2006 to March 2007 under the CST Act pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.DWARAKANATH Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per DSRV, J ) The petitioner is a registered dealer on the rolls of the first respondent-Commercial Tax Officer, Madhapur Circle, Hyderabad under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short ‘the Act’). The first respondent has issued an assessment order dated 24.01.2008 for the tax period from April, 2006 to March, 2007. Aggrieved by the same, he preferred an appeal before the appellate authority and the petitioner has paid 12.5% of the disputed tax and also filed an application to grant stay of collection of balance disputed tax of Rs Rs.1,44,25,015/- and the said application was rejected by the second respondent on 05.03.2008. As there was severe pressure from the first respondent, the petitioner filed W.P.No.5659 of 2008, wherein this Court granted stay of recovery of the disputed tax on payment of 50% of the disputed tax on or before 31.03.2008 and the same was complied with by the petitioner. While so, the second respondent, by order dated 22.11.2008, dismissed the appeal insofar as the disputed turn over of Rs.74,97,180/-. However, he allowed the appeal in part and remanded the matter back to the Audit Officer insofar as the disputed turn over of Rs.6,99,40,209/-, against which, the petitioner has preferred an appeal on 02.01.2009 before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. During the pendency of the appeal, the first respondent has issued notice dated 20.12.2008 demanding an amount of Rs.7,49,718/- on the ground that the petitioner has not filed ‘C’ forms against the said turnover. The first respondent directed the petitioner to pay the said demanded amount within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice. Hence, he filed the present writ petition. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, since the appeal is pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents not to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax subject to condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax within four weeks from today, after giving credit to the amounts already paid towards the tax. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ D.S.R.VARMA, J ________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J Date:07.01.2009 sj