IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9790 of 2009 Between: M/s. Soundarya Decorators Pvt. Ltd., 8-2-334/341, Megacity, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, rep. by its Manager-Accounts, D. Kumaresan. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, A.P., Hyderabad. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 The Commercial Tax Officer, Begumpet Circle, 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 declaring the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the stay application vide proceedings dated 25.03.2009 in CCT's Ref.No.LIII(2)/132/2009 for the period April, 2007 to March, 2008 as arbitrary, contrary to law and in violation of principles of natural justice and rule of law and consequently grant stay of collection of disputed tax of Rs.67,39,402/- as against total disputed demand of Rs.72,31,467/- pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9790 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the stay application vide proceedings dated 25.3.2009, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently, to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.67,39,402/- pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that aggrieved by the assessment proceedings of the 3rd respondent, an appeal has been preferred before the 2nd respondent and along with the appeal, an application seeking stay of collection of the disputed was filed, but, the said stay petition was rejected by the 2nd respondent and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a revision application before the 1st respondent, but the 1st respondent also refused to grant stay. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent and the same is pending and that taking advantage of the proceedings issued by respondents 1 and 2 refusing to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax, pending the appeal, coercive steps may be taken by the authorities and in these circumstances, if the stay is not granted and if 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 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 already 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 B. Chandra Kumar Date: 6th May, 2009 Gurc/nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9790 of 2009 (Order of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Meena Kumari) 06.05.2009