https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163575 Where disputed tax demands are under appellate challenge, interim protection may be granted to preserve the effectiveness of the appeal if coercive recovery would defeat the remedy. The Court did not decide the vires challenge to section 33(8) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, but on the facts noted the long pendency of the appeals and the pursuit of substantial recovery. It held that deposit of tax was not a condition precedent to hearing the appeals on merits, yet the ends of justice required that recovery remain stayed while the appellate proceedings continued. en-us Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Nov 2014 10:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163575 Where disputed tax demands are under appellate challenge, interim protection may be granted to preserve the effectiveness of the appeal if coercive recovery would defeat the remedy. The Court did not decide the vires challenge to section 33(8) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, but on the facts noted the long pendency of the appeals and the pursuit of substantial recovery. It held that deposit of tax was not a condition precedent to hearing the appeals on merits, yet the ends of justice required that recovery remain stayed while the appellate proceedings continued. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163575