IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND SIX PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.APPA RAO WRIT PETITION No.20436 OF 2006 Between: M/s Chalapathi Agencies ..... PETITIONER AND The Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, A.P., Hyderabad and others ....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.APPA RAO WRIT PETITION No.20436 OF 2006 O R D E R (Per Sri Justice J.Chelameswar) This writ petition is filed with a prayer as follows: “… Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the stay application by proceedings dt.12.5.2006 in CCT Ref No.L III (3)/275/2006 as arbitrary, contrary to law, weight of evidence and probabilities of petitioner’s case and consequently grant stay of collection of disputed demand of Rs.1,15,279/- for the assessment year 2000-01 pending disposal of the appeal before Hon’ble Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and pass …” The petitioner is a proprietary concern and a dealer in soft drinks like Pepsi, registered on the rolls of the 3rd respondent under the APGST Act (for short ‘the Act’). For the assessment year 2000-2001, the 3rd respondent computed the assessment of the petitioner’s liability under the above-mentioned Act by his proceedings dated 29.11.2001. The 2nd respondent revised the above-mentioned assessment in exercise of power vested under Section 20 (2) of the Act and came to a conclusion that the petitioner is liable to pay the amount higher than the one determined by the Assessing Authority. The revisional order is dated 21.1.2006. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the A.P. Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner also filed an application before the 1st respondent seeking stay of collection of disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal. The 1st respondent by his proceedings dated 12.5.2006 rejected the said application. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission itself, directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax, during the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal and on condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the tax, as determined by the revisional authority, within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The amount of tax if any paid already with reference to the above-mentioned assessment order shall be given credit to while computing the above-mentioned deposit of 50%. ----------------------------------- JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR ----------------------------- JUSTICE D.APPA RAO 28TH SEPTEMBER, 2006 Note: Operative portion by wire Bo cvm THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.APPA RAO WRIT PETITION No.19805 OF 2006 (Per Sri Justice J.Chelameswar) 28TH SEPTEMBER, 2006