Writ court can moderate interim deposit conditions where lockdown and business disruption make compliance impracticable.

In writ jurisdiction, the High Court moderated an interim deposit condition attached to a stay order, holding that the requirement of a 30% deposit could be reduced in light of the prevailing lockdown, lack of normal business activity, and difficulty in mobilising funds within the stipulated time. Although the statutory condition under Section 55(4) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was not strictly applicable to the second appeal, the Court treated it as a relevant guide and reduced the deposit to 20%, allowing payment in two instalments. The Tribunal appeal remained pending subject to compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the condition in the stay order requiring deposit of 30% of the disputed amount deserved reduction in the exercise of writ jurisdiction, having regard to the prevailing circumstances.

Analysis: The appeal before the Tribunal was pending and the stay application had been disposed of by requiring a 30% deposit. The Court noted that the statutory condition under Section 55(4) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was not strictly applicable to the second appeal, but considered it relevant as a guide. In view of the lockdown, the absence of normal business activity, and the difficulty in generating funds within the time fixed, the Court found it to interfere with the stay condition and moderate the deposit requirement.

Conclusion: The condition was reduced from 30% to 20%, and the petitioner was granted time to deposit the amount in two instalments.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded only to the extent of modification of the interim deposit condition, while the appeal before the Tribunal was left to be decided on compliance.

---