Statutory appeal rights may be regulated by law, including withdrawal of stay power in second appeals, without violating equality.

The statutory right of appeal may be regulated by the Legislature, including by withdrawing an ancillary power such as stay, so long as the appeal itself remains intact. The power to grant stay is not an inherent or indispensable part of appellate jurisdiction, and an express statutory bar removing that power in second appeals was held constitutionally permissible. The classification between first appeals and second appeals was treated as a valid legislative distinction and not discriminatory under article 14. The amended sub-sections (3A) and (5) of section 22 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, were therefore upheld, and the challenge to the withdrawal of stay power failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether sub-section (3A) and sub-section (5) of section 22 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, as amended, were unconstitutional for taking away the Appellate Tribunal's power to grant stay during second appeals, and whether the amended provisions violated article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The right of appeal is a statutory right and the Legislature which creates it may also regulate it, including by imposing conditions or withdrawing an ancillary power, so long as the appeal itself is not destroyed. The power to grant stay is not an integral part of the right of appeal; it may be incidental where the statute confers appellate jurisdiction without prohibiting such power. Here, however, the amendment expressly removed the Tribunal's power to grant stay in the class of second appeals covered by the amended provisions. The distinction drawn by the Legislature between first appeals and second appeals was held to be a permissible legislative classification and not discriminatory. The decisions relied upon against the amendment were held distinguishable because they dealt with situations where no express statutory prohibition existed.

Conclusion: The amended sub-section (3A) and sub-section (5) of section 22 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, were upheld as valid. The challenge based on article 14 failed, and the assessee was not entitled to relief against the withdrawal of stay power in second appeals.

Final Conclusion: The common judgment confirms that the Legislature can validly withdraw the appellate Tribunal's stay jurisdiction in specified tax appeals without infringing the constitutional guarantee of equality, where the appellate remedy itself remains intact.

Ratio Decidendi: The power to grant stay is not an inherent or indispensable component of the statutory right of appeal, and an express legislative withdrawal of that ancillary power is constitutionally permissible if the appellate remedy continues to exist.

---