2019 (12) TMI 104 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Grant of stay during for a limited period only during the pendency of the appeals - petitioner seeks for a direction to the first respondent to grant stay till the disposal of the appeals - HELD THAT - There is no dispute to the fact that the first respondent/Appellate Authority has granted interim stay subject to the conditions as stated - It is an admitted fact that the petitioner has complied with the conditions imposed. Now, the period of stay granted by the Appellate Authority got expired and however, the appeals are still pending before the first respondent. In view of the fact that the petitioner has extended the bank guarantees upto 06.05.2021, this Court is of the view that the interest of the parties will be protected, if the second respondent is directed to accept the extended bank guarantees and consequently, the first respondent is directed to extend the stay till the disposal of the appeals, also with a direction for disposal of the appeals within a time stipulated by this Court. The petitioner shall furnish the extended bank guarantees before the second respondent within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner aggrieved by limited period of stay granted by first respondent, seeks direction for stay till disposal of appeals.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged interim orders of stay granted for a limited period of 6 months by the first respondent during the pendency of appeals. The petitioner sought a direction for an extended stay till the disposal of the appeals. The relevant assessment years were 2000-2001 and 2001-2002, with the petitioner filing appeals before the first respondent/Appellate Authority against the orders passed by the second respondent/Assessing Officer. The Appellate Authority had granted interim stay with a validity period of six months, subject to specific conditions regarding payment of tax arrears and furnishing bank guarantees. The petitioner complied with these conditions, but the stay expired before the appeals were disposed of.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the bank guarantees were extended until 06.05.2021, and the petitioner had attempted to provide the extended guarantees to the Assessing Officer without success. On the other hand, the Additional Government Pleader for the respondents acknowledged the petitioner's compliance with the conditions but stated that the Assessing Officer had not received the extended bank guarantees.

The High Court noted that the petitioner had fulfilled the conditions set by the Appellate Authority and had extended the bank guarantees until a later date. In light of this, the Court directed the second respondent to accept the extended bank guarantees and instructed the first respondent to extend the stay until the appeals were disposed of. Additionally, the Court mandated the first respondent to decide on the appeals within a specified timeframe.

Consequently, the Court issued directions for the petitioner to furnish the extended bank guarantees within seven days, for the second respondent to inform the first respondent upon receipt of the guarantees, for the first respondent to extend the stay until the appeal's disposal, and for the first respondent to decide on the appeals within four months. The judgment concluded without imposing any costs, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed.