2018 (9) TMI 1799 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court Upholds Tribunal's Stay Conditions in Assessment Proceedings under KVAT Act

The Court declined to interfere with the Tribunal's discretion in imposing conditions for granting a stay in assessment proceedings under the KVAT Act. ... Non-compliance with the pre-deposit - petitioner's case is that if the petitioner is given some breathing time, he will comply with the condition of pre-deposit - Held that:- This Court will not interfere with the discretion of the Tribunal in imposing any condition to sustain a stay, more particularly when that discretion has a statutory sanction. Nevertheless, given the persistent plea the petitioner's counsel advanced that the petitioner has been facing acute financial problems, this Court may take considerate view of the situation. The petition disposed off holding that the petitioner shall deposit the amount, as the Tribunal directed, in six equal monthly instalments. Issues:Assessment proceedings under the KVAT Act; Appeal and petitions for stay pending before the 2nd respondent Tribunal; Interim order to deposit 20% and furnish security; Petitioner's financial difficulties; Compliance with pre-deposit and security directions; Court's interference with Tribunal's discretion; Statutory sanction for Tribunal's discretion; Petitioner's financial problems; Disposal of the writ petition with a payment schedule.Assessment Proceedings under the KVAT Act:The petitioner, a dealer under the KVAT Act, filed a second appeal and petitions for stay before the 2nd respondent Tribunal, challenging the assessment proceedings. The appeal and petitions were pending with the Tribunal, and an interim order was issued, requiring the petitioner to deposit 20% and provide security for the balance amount.Petitioner's Financial Difficulties and Compliance:The petitioner's counsel highlighted the financial difficulties faced by the petitioner but requested additional time to comply with the Tribunal's directions regarding pre-deposit and security. The counsel assured that the petitioner would adhere to the pre-deposit condition if granted some breathing space.Court's Discretion and Statutory Sanction:The Court emphasized that it would not interfere with the Tribunal's discretion in imposing conditions for granting a stay, especially when such discretion is supported by statutory provisions. Despite this, the Court acknowledged the petitioner's financial struggles and considered the plea made by the petitioner's counsel.Disposition of the Writ Petition:In light of the circumstances, the Court disposed of the writ petition by ordering the petitioner to deposit the amount directed by the Tribunal in six equal monthly instalments. However, a condition was imposed that failure to pay two consecutive instalments within the specified time would allow the Tribunal to proceed without involving the Court further. This decision aimed to balance the petitioner's financial challenges with the need to comply with the Tribunal's directives.