9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1241 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxRejection of stay application - petitioner has already paid 25% of the demand at the time of filing the first appeal before the VAT Appellate Tribunal - Classification of goods - rate of tax - HELD THAT - The impugned order is set aside and the stay of recovery of the balance amount is granted, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits with the concerned authority, 25% of the demand in addition to the 25% already paid. This amount shall be paid within a period of six (06) weeks. Upon such payment, the petitioner shall have the benefit of stay pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal - Petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.
Issues: Application for stay pending disposal of first appeal before VAT Tribunal
Analysis: The judgment delivered by the High Court pertains to a writ petition filed by a dealer under the Telangana VAT Act, 2005, challenging the rejection of an application for stay pending disposal of a first appeal before the VAT Tribunal. The petitioner had already paid 25% of the demand at the time of filing the first appeal. The main issue involved in the case was the classification and the rate of tax applicable to the petitioner's situation. The Hon'ble Judges, Sri V. Ramasubramanian and Sri P. Keshava Rao, observed that the outright rejection of the stay application was not appropriate considering the circumstances. They opined that instead of rejecting the application, some conditions could have been imposed on the petitioner. Therefore, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and granted a stay of recovery of the balance amount. However, this stay was subject to the condition that the petitioner must deposit an additional 25% of the demand with the concerned authority, in addition to the 25% already paid. This deposit was required to be made within six weeks from the date of the judgment. Once this payment was made, the petitioner would benefit from the stay pending the disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal. The judgment further clarified that there would be no order as to costs in this case. Additionally, any miscellaneous petitions pending in the writ petition were to be closed as a result of this decision. The High Court's ruling provided relief to the petitioner by allowing the stay of recovery of the balance amount, subject to the specified conditions, and ensuring that the appeal process could proceed without undue financial burden on the dealer.
|
