IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 11758 of 2008 Between: M/s. Veeramani Biscuit Industries Limited, Regd. Office : 16-2-851/a/1, Saidabad, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Executive Director Mr. P. Julius Esooran Rajaiah. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Commissioner (CT), LTU, Charminar Division, Hyderabad. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Vanasthalipuram 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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the stay application filed by the Petitioner through the impugned proceedings Dt. 12-5-2008 and the consequential action of the 1st respondent in insisting for payment of the balance disputed tax of Rs. 48,66,028/- out of the total disputed tax of Rs. 56,03,922/- for the assessment year 2004- 05 under the APGST Act and coercive action of the 3rd respondent in issuing impugned distraint order in Form-I Dt. 27-5-2008 invoking powers under Revenue Recovery Act as illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and without authority of law and jurisdiction and set aside the same and restrain the 1st and 3rd respondents from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax of Rs.48,66,028/- pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BHASKAR REDDY VEMIREDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring action of the second respondent in rejecting the stay application filed by the petitioner by the impugned proceedings dated 12.5.2008 and the consequential action of the first respondent in insisting upon payment of the balance disputed tax of Rs.48,66,028/- for the assessment year 2004-2005 and the coercive action of the 3rd respondent in using impugned distraint order in Form – I dated 27.5.2008 invoking powers under the Revenue Recovery Act, as illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the same and restrain the respondents 1 and 3 from taking coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax, pending appeal before the second respondent, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner which is a Limited Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of biscuits and confectionery, is registered dealer under the APGST, CST and VAT Acts and an assessee on the rolls of the first respondent herein. The first respondent completed assessment for the year 2004-2005 under the APGST by order dated 29.3.2008, which was appealed against by the petitioner and also filed stay application before the 2nd respondent, who by order dated 12.5.2008 dismissed the stay application pending appeal. It is submitting that taking advantage of the said dismissal of stay petition, the first respondent is insisting for payment of the disputed tax and initiated coercive steps and got issued distraint order dated 27.5.2008 through the third respondent. Hence the present writ petition is filed. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though several contentions were raised before the second respondent, the second respondent has refused to grant stay vide the order impugned herein. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission directing the petitioner to deposit half of the tax amount due, as per the impugned order, within a period of eight weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive step for recovery of the tax, pending finalisation of the appeal by the Appellate Authority. It is made clear that the amount paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. The distraint order 27.5.2008 is suspended pending appeal. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. __________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. JUNE 10, 2008 Copy by tomorrow //BO// MAS ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}