2007 (3) TMI 712 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of the interim order passed by the Tribunal granting stay of payment of 75% of disputed tax.
2. Whether the Tribunal should be directed to take up the main appeal for consideration.
3. Modification of the direction for furnishing security.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a writ to direct the Tribunal to re-dispose the stay petition in T.P. No. 92 of 2004. The petitioner's contention was regarding an assessment order made for the assessment year 1996-97 under CST, treating transactions as inter-State sales. An interim order by the Tribunal granted stay of 75% of the disputed tax, with a condition to pay the balance by a specified date. The court considered the financial implications of interfering with the Tribunal's order, noting that a significant portion of relief had been granted to the petitioner. The court decided not to interfere with the payment of tax as directed by the Tribunal but modified the direction for furnishing security by requiring a personal bond from the company's directors.

2. The petitioner argued that the Tribunal should be directed to take up the main appeal for consideration instead of keeping the interim order in place. The court, after considering the submissions from both parties, decided that since a substantial relief had already been granted to the petitioner in the form of the interim order, it was not necessary to direct the Tribunal to take up the main appeal immediately. However, the court directed the Tribunal to consider the petitioner's appeal if it was ripe for hearing without disrupting the Tribunal's schedule.

3. The court modified the direction for furnishing security by requiring a personal bond from the directors of the company instead of any other form of security. This modification was made considering the financial implications and the fact that a major portion of relief had already been granted to the petitioner through the interim order. The court balanced the interests of both parties and ensured that the petitioner had to provide a personal bond as security while allowing the Tribunal to proceed with the appeals of the year 2003 without significant alterations to its schedule.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petition without imposing any costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed. The judgment provided a balanced approach by considering the financial implications, the relief granted to the petitioner, and the need to maintain the Tribunal's schedule while ensuring that the petitioner provided appropriate security in the form of a personal bond.