9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 1167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceedings for the year April, 2014 to March, 2015 the Tribunal had ruled that the products are leviable with tax at 5.5.%, it would be appropriate that the deposit for the purpose of consideration of his application for stay under Section 62(4)(c)(i) be waived considering the order in STA Nos. 749 750/2016. However, it is clarified that in the event the order in STA Nos. 749 750/2016, is set aside in S.T.R.P.No.102/2018, the petitioner would be relegated to the same stage of his interim relief being subject to deposit as contemplated under Section 62(4)(c)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, petition is disposed off while clarifying that the petition is being disposed off only as regards to the limited aspect of deposit to be made for seeki ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16. It is further submitted that as against the order of the Assessing Officer under Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Act, 1956 an appeal has been filed by the petitioner, copy of which is produced at Annexure-K. 3. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for the purpose of consideration of interim relief before the appellate authority in terms of Section 62(4)(c)(i) of the Act, the petitioner is required to make payment of 30%, upon which the appellate authority may in its discretion consider stay of payment of 70% of tax. It is contended that this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction ought to interfere in the matter and order for waiving of deposit of 30% in order to be eligible for consideration of interim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 22.09.2017, upholding the contention of the company as regards treating the products as IT products and leviable to tax at the slab of 5.5%. In light of the order in STA Nos.749 750/2016 and in light of the claim of the petitioner that for the subsequent year he is to have the benefit of the same order on the principle of parity, prima facie there is some force in the contention of the petitioner which however is a matter still to be decided and the aforestated contention of the petitioner is pending consideration in the appeal proceedings. 8. However, taking note of the order in STA Nos. 749 750/2016, which remains in force and not having been stayed, taking note the peculiar facts of the case including that the petitioner is a Pub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
