APHC010582192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] WEDNESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 30245/2025 Between: 1. M/S. SATISH CHANDRA OZA AND SONS,, REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR. NIKHIL OZA, 26-15-163, MAIN ROAD, VISAKHAPATNAM-530 003. ...PETITIONER AND 1. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER CT LEGAL, O/O COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KUNCHANAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER11, GAJUWAKA CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. JOINT COMMISSIONER ST, DEENADAYALPURAM, CHINAGADILI, VISHAKHAPATNAM. 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAX, KURUPAM MARKET CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2 ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, setting aside the order of 1st Respondent passed in CCTs Ref.No.LII(1)/19/2020 dated 5.8.2025 for the tax period 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 as being illegal, arbitrary and consequently restrain the Respondents from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax of Rs.43,31,608/-, out of the total disputed tax of Rs.1,51,73,813 pending disposal of the appeal in T.A.No.12 of 2024 before the Andhra Pradesh VAT Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam and pass 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 grant stay of recovery of the balance disputed tax of Rs.43,31,608/- out of total disputed tax of Rs.1,51,73,813/- for the tax period 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, pursuant to the order of the 1®* Respondent dated 05.08.2025, pending disposal of the Writ Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 3 The Court made the following ORDER: (Per Sri Justice R.Raghunandana Rao) The petitioner is a registered dealer, who is engaged in trading cement products as well as in asbestos sheets and aluminum products. The assessment for the period 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 was completed by way of an order of assessment, dated 20.12.2018, by the Deputy Commercial Tax officer-II, Gajuwaka Circle. Thereafter, this order was revised by the Deputy Commercial Officer, Visakhapatnam Division, by way of revisional order, dated 09.05.2022. 2. In the revisional order, the Deputy Commissioner took the view that the Commission earned by the petitioner, on the sale of products of its principal, should be treated as part of the taxable turnover and levied tax on such taxable turnover. 3. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached the APVAT Appellate Tribunal, by way of T.A.No.12 of 2024. It appears that the petitioner had also complied with the pre deposit of 25% of the disputed tax and has deposited the same. 4. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached the Additional Commissioner(CT), Legal, for stay of collection of tax arising out of the orders under appeal. This application was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner, by order, dated 05.08.2025. 4 5. Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of the present writ petition. 6. Sri P.Karthik Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has deposited, apart from the pre deposit amount of 25% disputed tax, further sums which aggregated to more than 50% of the disputed tax. 7. A perusal of the order under challenge would show that the Additional Commissioner except accepting the view of the Deputy Commissioner, has not taken any other material into account. 8. We do not propose to express any view on the merits of the appeal as any such view would affect the disposal of the said appeal. However, it would suffice to state that the petitioner does have a case to make out before the Tribunal. 9. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of staying all further collection of disputed tax arising out of the order of revision, dated 09.05.2022, subject to the condition of petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax. For this purpose, the payment of tax made by the petitioner earlier shall also to be taken into account to ascertain whether 50% has been paid or not. Six(6) weeks time is granted to the petitioner for depositing such additional amount 5 as may be necessary to make out 50% of the total disputed tax. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J Date: 19.11.2025 KA 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 30245/2025 Date: 19.11.2025 KA