IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 11834 of 2010 Dated: 1.6.2010 Between: M/s. Padmavathi Agencies, rep., by its Proprietor Somisetty Srinivasa Rao. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Deputy Commercial Tax Officer and another. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 11834 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the stay petition, vide order, dated 6.5.2010, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to grant stay of collection of the balance disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal. Challenging the assessment order passed by the 1st respondent, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent and also paid 12.5% of the disputed tax and along with the said appeal, the petitioner has also filed a petition seeking stay of collection of the balance disputed tax, but the 2nd respondent rejected the stay petition vide the order impugned herein. Now, the respondents are insisting for payment of the disputed tax. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending before the 2nd respondent and that the petitioner had already paid 12.5% of the disputed tax, and as the stay application was rejected by the 2nd respondent, the respondents-authorities are insisting for payment of the disputed tax and in these circumstances, if the stay is not granted and the entire disputed tax is recovered, the very purpose of filing the appeal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending before the 2nd respondent, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we feel it a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the balance disputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, within a period of eight weeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amount paid if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao Date: 1st June, 2010 nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 11834 of 2010 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 1/06/2010