Interim relief safeguards under the Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal Act require notice, disclosure, and security before ex parte relief is granted.

Section 8(7) of the Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal Act, 1995 treats prior notice, disclosure of documents, and payment or security for revenue as mandatory conditions before interim relief is granted, and any relaxation is confined to exceptional cases supported by recorded reasons. Ex parte interim relief may be allowed only where refusal would cause dislocation, disruption, or closure of business, or loss incapable of adequate monetary compensation. On the stated facts, the pleadings did not disclose sufficient particulars to bypass these safeguards, and mere assertions of hardship were insufficient. The material also failed to show the requisite exceptional harm, so ex parte interim relief was not warranted.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the requirements for interim relief under section 8(7) of the Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal Act, 1995 could be relaxed or dispensed with for grant of ex parte relief; (ii) Whether the case justified grant of ex parte interim relief.

Issue (i): Whether the requirements for interim relief under section 8(7) of the Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal Act, 1995 could be relaxed or dispensed with for grant of ex parte relief.

Analysis: Section 8(7) makes prior notice, disclosure of documents, and payment or security for revenue mandatory requirements before interim relief can be granted. Relaxation is permissible only as an exceptional measure when reasons are recorded in writing and the Tribunal is satisfied that refusal would cause loss leading to dislocation, disruption, or closure of business, or loss incapable of adequate monetary compensation. The pleadings did not disclose sufficient particulars to justify bypassing these safeguards, and the applicant had sufficient time to serve notice.

Conclusion: The requirements of section 8(7) were not liable to be dispensed with.

Issue (ii): Whether the case justified grant of ex parte interim relief.

Analysis: Ex parte interim relief can be granted only in an exceptional case, and the Tribunal must act with greater circumspection and record reasons. The material placed did not show how the applicants' business would be dislocated, disrupted, or closed if the goods were not immediately released. Mere assertion of hardship was insufficient, and the statutory threshold for exceptional relief was not met.

Conclusion: Ex parte interim relief was not justified.

Final Conclusion: The application for interim relief failed, and the matter was directed to proceed only after due notice to the opposite party.

---