Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2019 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 378 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxExtension of time granted for deposit of Bank Guarantee - extension sought on the ground that the applicant has suffered a loss in the financial year 2017-18 - Held that - This court had directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of ₹ 20 lakhs with the respondent authorities latest by 30.11.2018 and to further furnish a bank guarantee of a similar amount which should be kept alive till the first appeal is disposed of. However, for the reasons set out in the memorandum of application and as submitted before the court, the applicant is not in a position to deposit the same within the aforesaid time limit. The court is of the view that the interest of justice would best be served if suitable time is granted to the applicant for depositing the sum of ₹ 20,00,000/- and furnishing the bank guarantee in compliance of the order dated 24.10.2018 passed by this court - application allowed in part.
Issues: Application for extension of time limit for depositing a sum of money and furnishing a bank guarantee.
Analysis: The judgment delivered by the Gujarat High Court involved an application seeking an extension of the time limit granted for depositing a sum of money and providing a bank guarantee. The petitioner, represented by Mr. Krunal Nanavati, argued that they were unable to comply with the previous order due to financial losses in the previous year. On the other hand, Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, representing the respondent, contended that sufficient time had already been granted, and no further relief was warranted. The court noted the previous order directing the petitioner to deposit a specific amount and furnish a bank guarantee by a certain date, which the petitioner could not meet. Considering the circumstances, the court found it just to grant an extension for the petitioner to fulfill the requirements of the previous order. The court, in its analysis, acknowledged the petitioner's inability to comply within the initial time frame and deemed it appropriate in the interest of justice to allow an extension. The judgment extended the time limit for depositing the specified sum and providing the bank guarantee until a later date. The court clarified that this extension was granted as a one-time relief and no further extensions would be entertained. Ultimately, the application partly succeeded, and the court made the rule absolute to the extent of the granted extension, without imposing any costs on either party.
|