Stay continuation for second appeal requires a fresh extension order; first-appeal stay does not operate automatically.

A stay granted by the Joint Commissioner for the first appeal under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act did not continue automatically into a second appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Continuation of stay during the Tribunal stage depended on a fresh application and a specific extension order under section 19(2-C). In the absence of such an order, there was no statutory bar to recovery of the disputed tax, and the demand notice remained valid. The legal point is that a first-appeal stay does not by itself carry forward to the second appellate stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether a stay granted by the Joint Commissioner under section 19(2-B) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 continues automatically during the pendency of a second appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, or whether a specific order of extension under section 19(2-C) is required before recovery can be made.

Analysis: The statutory scheme distinguished between stay granted in aid of the first appeal and continuance of such stay during the second appeal. The concluding words of section 19(2-C) made continuation of stay during the Tribunal appeal dependent upon a fresh application and a specific order by the Joint Commissioner. A stay operating during the first appeal did not, by itself, carry forward to the second appeal. In the absence of an order extending the stay under section 19(2-C), there was no statutory bar to recovery of the disputed tax.

Conclusion: The demand notice was valid and the assessee was not entitled to automatic continuance of stay pending the second appeal. The conclusion is against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: Continuance of stay during a second appeal under section 19(2-C) requires a specific extension order by the Joint Commissioner; a stay granted for the first appeal does not operate automatically.

---