APHC010345822025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3541] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17556/2025 Between: 1. M/S. ABHI SAI TYRES, , D. NO. 532/A/1, OPP RTC BUS STAND, MAIN ROAD, URAVAKONDA ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P., REP. BY ITS PARTNER B. VENKATANARAYANA CHOWDARY. 515812 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER1, GUNTAKAL CIRCLE, OLD GOOTY ROAD, NEAR VEGETABLE MARKET, GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPURAMU DIVISION, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, GUNTAKAL CIRCLE, OLD GOOTY ROAD, NEAR VEGETABLE MARKET, GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPURAMU DIVISION, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 4. THE MANAGER, ANDHRA BANK (NOW UNION BANK OF INDIA) FLAT NO. 9-2-222/7, OPP C.L. OFFICE, ANANTAPUR ROAD, URAVAKONDA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. A.P. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 RRR,J & JS,J W.P.No.17556 of 2025 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS holding that action of the First Respondent in initiating Coercive Steps by issuing the impugned Demand for Payment of Amount Outstanding of a VAT Dealer from the Bank/Third Party in Form VAT 206, dated 30-06-2025, to the Fourth Respondent Bank where the Petitioner is having its Account, for recovery of the balance 50percent of the disputed tax due as per the Assessment Order A.O. no. 183663, dated 20-12-2019 for the Tax Periods 03-06-2016 to 31-03-2017, passed by the Second Respondent under the A.P. VAT Act, 2005, even though the Second Appeal filed by the Petitioner vide T.A. No. 133 of 2023 before the A.P. VAT Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, against the ADC Order no. ZH370622OD78297 / Appeal No. 05/2020-21 (ATP), dated 29- 06-2022, passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupati, dismissing the First Appeal against the same, is pending and the Petitioner has already deposited 50percent of the disputed tax towards Statutory Deposits for maintaining the Appeal, as arbitrary, unjustified, contrary to law and illegal and consequently set aside the same and grant stay of collection of tax pursuant to the same pending disposal of the T.A. No. 133 of 2023, IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant stay of collection of the balance disputed tax pursuant to Assessment Order A.O. no. 183663, dated 20-03-2019 for the Tax Periods 03-06-2016 to 31-03-2017, passed by the Second Respondent under the A.P. VAT Act, 2005, Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 3 RRR,J & JS,J W.P.No.17556 of 2025 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The 2nd respondent had raised a demand of Rs.15,28,202/- against the petitioner, by way of an assessment order, dated 20.12.2019. The petitioner being aggrieved by the same, had filed an Appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner vide Appeal No.05/2020-21 (ATP). This Appeal came to be dismissed, on 29.06.2022. Thereafter, the petitioner, approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.3252 of 2023 against the Appellate Order. This Court, by an Order, dated 09.02.2023, had disposed of the Writ Petition with liberty being granted to the petitioner to file a statutory Second Appeal before the A.P. V.A.T. Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. 2. The petitioner filed T.A.No.133 of 2023 before the A.P. V.A.T. Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. By then, the petitioner, had deposited 12.5% of the disputed tax while filing the Appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and deposited another 37.5% of the disputed tax towards statutory deposit while filing the Appeal before the Tribunal. The said Tax Appeal is said to be still pending before the Tribunal. 3. At this stage, the 1st respondent is said to have initiated coercive steps for the recovery of the balance 50% of the disputed tax, on the ground that, there is no stay for collection of the said tax amount. 4. Aggrieved by the said coercive steps, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Petition. 4 RRR,J & JS,J W.P.No.17556 of 2025 5. Sri G. Narendra Chetty, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that, in similar circumstances, the Division Benches of this Court, by an Order, dated 30.11.2022, in W.P.No.38430 of 2022 and by an Order, dated 27.06.2023, in W.P.Nos.15238 & 15241 of 2023, had granted stay of collection of the tax, pending Appeals before the Tribunal, on the ground that, the dealer therein had deposited 50% of the disputed tax. The learned counsel would submit that, similar order could be passed in the present Writ Petition also. 6. In view of the aforesaid Orders and in view of the fact that, the petitioner is said to have deposited 50% of the disputed tax, this Writ Petition is disposed of, staying all further steps for recovery of the remaining 50% of the disputed tax of the petitioner, pending disposal of the Appeal before the A.P. V.A.T. Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J _____________________ SUMATHI JAGADAM, J Date:23.07.2025 KPV 5 RRR,J & JS,J W.P.No.17556 of 2025 211 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION No:17556 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 23.07.2025 KPV