Writ challenge to 20% pre-deposit for tax stay failed as tenancy-consideration dispute was left for appeal.

A writ challenge to a condition requiring deposit of 20% of the disputed tax for stay of recovery pending appeal was rejected. The Court noted that the reassessment had resulted in an ex parte assessment after no documents or reply were produced, and held that the petitioner's contention that no consideration was received on transfer of tenancy was an issue for the statutory appeal, not a ground to relax the deposit condition in writ jurisdiction. The challenge to the recovery condition was therefore dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the direction to deposit 20% of the disputed tax amount as a condition for stay of recovery pending appeal deserved interference; and whether the petitioner's plea that no consideration was received on transfer of tenancy could justify waiver of the deposit condition at this stage.

Analysis: The petition assailed the condition imposed by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner requiring deposit of 20% of the disputed tax for staying the remaining recovery during pendency of the appeal. The record showed that the reassessment proceedings had culminated in an ex parte assessment after no documents or reply were produced. The Court noted that the petitioner's contention that no consideration was received on transfer of the tenancy was a matter for the appeal and did not furnish a ground to relax the deposit requirement in writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The challenge to the 20% deposit condition was rejected and the writ petition was dismissed.

---