Conditional stay of tax recovery upheld where deduction claims lacked full substantiation, with instalment payment permitted.

Conditional stay of recovery was upheld where the appellate authority found no prima facie material fully supporting the taxpayer's deduction claim under Rule 10 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, 2005. The record showed that notices were issued, replies were filed, books of account were produced, and the assessee was heard before assessment, while the supporting documents were found insufficient to substantiate the deduction in full. In that context, directing payment of 20% of the balance tax and interest was not interfered with, but the order was modified to permit payment by instalments.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conditional stay order directing payment of 20% of the balance tax and interest demanded, while considering the petitioner's claim for deduction under Rule 10 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, called for interference.

Analysis: The petitioner had claimed a substantial deduction against works contract receipts for the assessment year 2013-14, but the assessing authority found that the books of account and supporting materials did not substantiate the extent of deduction claimed. The record showed that notices were issued, replies were filed, adjournments were granted, the books of account were produced, and the petitioner was heard before the assessment was completed. The appellate authority, on a prima facie consideration, found no substantiating documents to support the claim in full and therefore imposed only a limited condition for stay of recovery.

Conclusion: The conditional stay order was upheld and no interference was warranted, except for modification granting payment by instalments.

---