Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellate authority and the Tribunal properly exercised discretion under the proviso to sub-section (1-B) of section 9 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, while refusing waiver or relaxation of the statutory pre-deposit requirement.
Analysis: The power to waive or relax the deposit condition is discretionary, but the discretion must be exercised judicially, honestly, bona fide, and on relevant material. It is intended to mitigate the rigour of the pre-deposit requirement in appropriate cases, and the authority must consider the assessee's ability to pay and other relevant factors. The Tribunal relied on matters that were not germane to the enquiry, including the perceived merits of the assessment and the fact that the assessee carried on business in later years, while failing to examine the serious assertions regarding closure of business and inability to make the deposit. A decision resting on irrelevant considerations is vitiated.
Conclusion: The refusal to grant waiver or relaxation was unsustainable and the impugned order was liable to be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: Discretion to waive a statutory pre-deposit must be exercised on relevant, objective, and bona fide considerations, and an order founded on irrelevant factors is vitiated.