9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xt.P1 order. At the time of filing the appeal, he will not be required to make any payment as a pre-condition for the hearing of the waiver application by the Tribunal. I, therefore, relegate the petitioner to the alternate remedy available under the Finance Act, 1994, as amended, of approaching the Appellate Tribunal by way of an appeal against Ext.P1 order. It is made clear that the appeal to be filed by the petitioner would be governed by the statutory provisions, as they stood prior to the amendment introduced with effect from 16.08.2014. - Decided against assessee. - WP(C).No. 9848 of 2015 (E) - - - Dated:- 27-3-2015 - MR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. FOR THE PETITIONER : SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON FOR THE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Appellate Tribunal. The only point that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner would have to deposit the amount of 7.5% of the tax confirmed against him, as a condition for pursuing the appellate remedy before the Tribunal. I note in this connection that recently, a Division Bench of the High Court of Telengana Andhra Pradesh has taken a prima facie view that, in as much as the lis in question had commenced prior to the introduction of the amendment to the Finance Act, 1994, with effect from August 2014, the petitioner's right of appeal as per the erstwhile provisions of law would not be affected by the provisions introduced by the amendment of 2014. Although not expressly referred to in the interim order dated 19.02.201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, relegate the petitioner to the alternate remedy available under the Finance Act, 1994, as amended, of approaching the Appellate Tribunal by way of an appeal against Ext.P1 order. It is made clear that the appeal to be filed by the petitioner would be governed by the statutory provisions, as they stood prior to the amendment introduced with effect from 16.08.2014. Thus, without making any observations on the merits of the case, and without prejudice to all the contentions that the petitioner can take against Ext.P1 order of the 2nd respondent, I dismiss the writ petition in its challenge against Ext.P1 order. 5. I make it clear that, if the petitioner prefers a duly constituted appeal under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
