9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1289 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxCondonation of delay of 59 days in filing appeal - case of petitioner is that either the mere filing of appeal or mere pendency of appeal does not amount to granting stay by the appellate authority - Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT - A case is made out for issuing necessary directions to 2nd respondent to dispose of the delay condonation petition and stay petition in Exts.P4 and P3 respectively. The appellate authority/2nd respondent considers and disposes of Exts. P4 and P3 applications as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
Issues: Delay in disposal of appeal, stay petition, and delay condonation petition under the KVAT Act.
The petitioner filed an appeal in Ext.P2 against the assessment order made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The appeal was accompanied by a delay condonation petition of 59 days in Ext.P4 and a stay petition in Ext.P3. The petitioner sought directions for the appellate authority to promptly consider and dispose of Exts.P4 and P3. The petitioner argued that the mere filing or pendency of an appeal does not automatically grant a stay, and delays in processing these petitions could result in the assessing officer taking recovery actions on the disputed tax amount, rendering the appeal ineffective. The petitioner contended that timely consideration of delay and stay petitions is crucial to protect the appellant's interests during the appeal process. Upon reviewing Exts.P1, P2, P4, and P3, the Court found a prima facie case for issuing directions to the 2nd respondent to expedite the disposal of the delay condonation and stay petitions in Exts.P4 and P3. Considering the limited prayer and grounds presented, the Court decided to dispose of the writ petition by issuing specific directions: (a) The appellate authority/2nd respondent must promptly consider and dispose of Exts.P4 and P3 applications, preferably within two months from the date of receiving a copy of the judgment. (b) The respondents were directed not to take coercive steps or recover the amounts determined in the orders under appeal for a period of ten weeks from the date of the judgment. This judgment aimed to ensure a fair and timely resolution of the pending petitions and protect the petitioner's rights during the appeal process under the KVAT Act.
|
