9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 877X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the Assessing Authority is under challenge in appeal by the revisionist. In appeal revisionist also moved an application for interim stay on which only 50% of the disputed tax liability was ordered to be stayed during the pendency of the appeal. 3. The revisionist was not satisfied. He therefore, preferred further appeal to the Tribunal wherein 70% of the disputed tax has been stayed. The revisionist is still not satisfied by the interim protection so granted has preferred this revision. It is being contended on his behalf that he has a strong prima facie case as no tax on the value of 'Child Parts' can be imposed and on account of financial distress he is likely to suffer undue hardship in the event any part of the dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd deemed sale. The amount for which auto parts/ components are sold constitutes turnover relating to such sale and sales tax trade tax is leviable on such actual or deemed sale but for every such sale there has to be a consideration therefore, for sale tax purposes consideration for transfer of property in goods has to be taken into account and tax has to be levied on the consideration of transfer of property in the case. The scheme of levy of excise duty is totally different and transfer of property in goods and ownership is irrelevant for excise purpose. The deemed fiction and notional adding in excise law are not in any way material for the purposes of sale tax. 8. In the instant case, in view of the agreement on record coupled with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to deposit the disputed amount of tax or penalty levied causes undue hardship when the party is ultimately likely to be exonerated from such a liability. 11. Even the Supreme Court in M/s Pennar Industries Ltd. v. State of A.P. and others, 2009 N.T.N. (Vol. 39)-126 observed that if on cursory glance it appears that the demand raised has no leg to stand, it would be undesirable to require the assessee to pay full or even substantive part of the demand and the stay application should not be disposed of in a routine manner unmindful of the consequences. 12. A careful consideration of the impugned order of the Tribunal dated 13th May, 2010 indicates that in the previous years also 70% of such demand against the revisionist was stayed. The Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ending adjudication of the lis. 14. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the legal position as narrated above I consider it appropriate to dispose of the revision finally with the direction to the Additional Commissioner, (Appeals) NOIDA before whom the revisionist's appeal No. 75 of 2010 is pending consideration to consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of six weeks from today and for a period of two months or till the appeal is decided, whichever is earlier, the recovery of the balance 30% of the disputed tax shall not be made from the revisionist provided it furnishes security other than cash or bank guarantee to the sanctification of the Assessing Authority within a period of two weeks from today. 15. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
