2011 (6) TMI 949 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to re-assessment orders and demand notices, application for stay of recovery of disputed tax, penalty, and interest, delay in disposal of appeals by appellate authority.

In the present case, the petitioner challenged the re-assessment orders and demand notices for the tax period from April 2006 to March 2007. The petitioner filed appeals before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)-3, Bangalore, along with applications for stay of recovery of disputed tax, penalty, and interest. The petitioner had already deposited 50% of the disputed taxes at the time of filing the appeals and sought stay for the recovery of the remaining 50%. The appellate authority granted stay for the balance of 50% subject to the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee. However, the appeals were not disposed of within 120 days from the date of the interim order, leading to the assessing authority attempting to recover the balance of the disputed taxes on the basis of deemed vacation of stay.

The petitioner contended that they were not responsible for the delay in the disposal of the appeals and emphasized that they had a strong case on merits. The petitioner expressed concerns about facing great hardship if the assessing authority proceeded with the recovery of the balance taxes before the appeals were decided. Considering the circumstances, the court directed that the respondent should refrain from taking steps to recover the balance of the taxes until the appeals were disposed of. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)-3 was instructed to adjudicate on the appeals within two months from the date of receipt of the court's order. Consequently, the writ petitions were disposed of accordingly.

Moreover, the learned HCGP was given permission to file his memo of appearance within eight weeks from the date of the order, with no costs imposed.