IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 23807 of 2008 Between: M/s. L.G.Electronics India Ltd., Pulla Reddy House, Kharkana Secunderabad, rep. by its Brach Accountant, Sri. Atul Chaturvedi, S/o. Amrish Kumar Chaturvedi. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Commissioner (CT) (Legal) (FAC), Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Nampally St.Road,Opp.Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (LTU), Abids Division, Nampally, 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 an appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Order dt. 14-10-2008 passed by the 1st Respondent in CCT's Ref.No.LV (1)/675/2008 for the tax period 2005-2006 as illegal, unjustiﬁed and contrary to the provisions of law. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents: SPL GP FOR TAXES The Court made the following: Oral Order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.GOPAL REDDY) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. Krishna Koundinya, learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes. With their consent, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. The grievance of the writ petitioner—Company is that the assessing authority levied tax on the supply and installation of Air Conditioners as sales of Air Conditioners rejecting their claim to treat the transactions as Works contracts. Against the assessment order the writ petitioner ﬁled appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), who dismissed the appeal; against which second appeal has been preferred before the STAT and moved an application before the Joint Commissioner (CT)— 1st respondent for staying the operation of the assessment order. The 1st respondent by the impugned order rejected the stay application. Hence the writ petition. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the second appeal preferred by the appellant is pending before the STAT, ends of justice would be met if the impugned assessment order as conﬁrmed by the appellate Deputy Commissioner is stayed pending disposal of the appeal before the STAT, subject to petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed Tax. Accordingly, there shall be stay of collection of the tax for the tax period 2005-2006 under the assessment order pending disposal of second appeal on condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax within four weeks from today. If the petitioner has already paid any amount towards the disputed tax, the same shall be given credit to while calculating the 50% amount. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. ____________________ VILAS V.AFULPURKAR,J. 03-11-2008 Note: CC in two days (bo) Murthy ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Joint Commissioner (CT) (Legal) (FAC), Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Nampally St.Road, Opp.Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (LTU), Abids Division, Nampally, Hyderabad. 4.2CCs to G.P. for Commercial Taxes (OUT) 5.2CD copies.