IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 3573 of 2008 Between: M/s. Sana Plastic Industries, Dorapalli Village, Dhone Mandal, Kurnool District, Rep by its Proprietrix, Smt S. Gosiya ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Kurnool. 2 The VAT Audit Officer, O/o. the Commercial Tax Officer-III, Kurnool. .....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 order or direction declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in insisting upon to pay balance disputed tax, penalty and interest inspite of payment made by the petitioner to a tune of Rs.6,73,957/- and Rs.3,45,771/- towards penalty and interest as per the orders of the Hon'ble Court dated 1.11.2007 and when sixty days time for filing appeal before the Hon'ble Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal expires on 13-4-2008, as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the act and without authority of law and consequently grant stay of collection of balance 50% of the disputed demand and 75% of penalty and interest pending disposal of the appeal before the Hon'ble Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondents.: SRI K. RAJI REDDY (SPL. STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX) The Court made the following : HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:3573 OF 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in insisting upon to pay balance disputed tax, penalty and interest inspite of payment of Rs.6,73,957/- and Rs.3,45,771/- towards penalty and interest, as arbitrary and contrary and consequently to grant stay of collection of balance 50% of the disputed tax and 75% of penalty and interest, pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. It is the case of the petitioner that against the remand proceedings of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent. But, the 1st respondent dismissed the appeal on 8.1.2008. Having aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is filing an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal on 19.2.2008. While so, the 2nd respondent is threatening to take coercive steps for recovery of the balance demand. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that an appeal has been preferred before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal against the orders of the 1st respondent and that the petitioner has already paid an amount of Rs.6,73,957/- and Rs.3,45,771/- towards penalty and interest. It is further contended that in the facts and circumstances of the case, if the relief of stay is not entertained and if the balance disputed tax, penalty and interest are 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 Tribunal and in view of the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already paid Rs.6,73,957/- and Rs.3,45,771/- towards penalty and interest, 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 demand and penalty pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax and 25% of the penalty, on or before 31st March, 2008. 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 G. Rohini Date: 25th February, 2008 Gurc. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:3573 OF 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 25/02/2008