Recovery of sales tax arrears continues during appeal absent a stay, under the Act's express recovery provisions.

The Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 permits assessed tax to be treated as immediately recoverable, with section 24 requiring payment on demand and creating a charge on the dealer's property on default. The Act also authorises recovery as arrears of land revenue, including garnishee and revenue recovery proceedings. Mere filing of an appeal does not suspend liability to pay, and recovery is barred only where the appellate or revisional authority has granted a suspensory direction and the dealer complies with it. On the plain language of the statute, equitable considerations cannot override these express recovery provisions, so recovery may continue during appeal absent a stay.

---

---

Issues: Whether recovery proceedings for tax arrears under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 could be initiated and continued during the pendency of appeals, in the absence of any specific stay or direction suspending recovery.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 treats assessed tax and other amounts due as immediately recoverable. Section 24 provides for payment within the time specified in the notice of demand and creates a charge on the dealer's property on default. The Act also permits recovery as arrears of land revenue, through garnishee proceedings, and by conferring powers under the revenue recovery machinery. The appellate and revisional provisions empower the authorities to issue directions regarding payment pending disposal, and the proviso to section 24 bars recovery only when the dealer has complied with such an order. Mere filing of an appeal does not suspend the liability to pay tax, though the statute separately postpones interest in certain cases. Applying the settled rule that a taxing statute must be construed according to its plain language, the Court held that equitable considerations cannot override the express recovery provisions.

Conclusion: Recovery proceedings were legally maintainable during the pendency of the appeals because no stay or suspensory direction had been granted by the appellate authority.

---