Conditional demand relief: payment required first, then reconsideration of alleged adjustment and refund claims.

The demand was not stayed unconditionally; the petitioner was required to pay the amount within the stipulated time before any further adjustment could be considered. Only after such payment were the respondents to examine the petitioner's later representations for additional adjustment of amounts allegedly due from the State. If any sum was found adjustable or refundable, appropriate adjustment or refund was to follow. The document therefore reflects a conditional relief structure: immediate protection against the demand was refused, but reconsideration of subsequent adjustment claims was preserved subject to prior payment.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to have the demand kept in abeyance and to secure reconsideration of further adjustment of amounts allegedly due to it from the State.

Analysis: The petitioner's challenge to the fresh demand was not accepted as an unconditional ground for relief. The direction issued required the petitioner first to discharge the amount covered by the demand within the stipulated time. Only after such payment would the respondents examine the petitioner's later representations for further adjustment of amounts, and, if any amount was found adjustable or refundable, appropriate adjustment or refund would follow.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not granted immediate relief against the demand, but was given a conditional opportunity to have the question of further adjustment reconsidered after payment.

---