Disputed tax pre-deposit covers tax only, not interest or penalty, under the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act.

For entertaining an appeal under Section 406(8) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, the expression "disputed tax" was construed narrowly to exclude interest and penalty. The levy scheme, demand and return forms, and penalty provisions separately distinguished tax from interest and penalty, and the statute did not use broader words such as "disputed demand". The pre-deposit condition therefore applied only to the disputed tax component, and not to ancillary interest or penalty amounts.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for the purpose of entertaining an appeal under Section 406(8) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, the expression "disputed tax" includes interest and penalty.

Analysis: The levy scheme under the Act and the Local Body Tax Rules treated local body tax as distinct from interest and penalty. The assessment and recovery provisions, the demand and return forms, and the penalty provisions separately referred to tax, interest, and penalty, showing that the legislature used these concepts distinctly. Section 406(8) specifically required deposit of the "disputed tax" and did not use broader language such as disputed demand. On that construction, the appeal pre-deposit condition was confined to the tax component alone. The earlier decisions dealing with property tax and penalty under different provisions were distinguished, while the decision recognizing the separation between cess, interest, and penalty was treated as supporting this interpretation.

Conclusion: The phrase "disputed tax" does not include interest or penalty, and only the disputed tax amount was required to be deposited for the appeal to be entertained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing statute and its rules consistently distinguish tax from interest and penalty, a statutory pre-deposit requirement limited to "disputed tax" cannot be expanded to include interest or penalty by implication.

---