https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163580 A statutory right of appeal may be conditioned by a reasonable pre-deposit requirement, and that condition does not become unconstitutional merely because it makes access to the appellate remedy more burdensome. The Karnataka High Court upheld section 22(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, which required deposit of one-half of the disputed tax or amount for maintaining an appeal, and also sustained the stay mechanism under section 22(5). The court held that the provisions operated uniformly, did not create invidious discrimination, and did not infringe Article 19 because they regulated the appellate process rather than prohibiting business activity. The constitutional challenge under Articles 14 and 19 failed. en-us Mon, 11 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Dec 2014 15:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163580 A statutory right of appeal may be conditioned by a reasonable pre-deposit requirement, and that condition does not become unconstitutional merely because it makes access to the appellate remedy more burdensome. The Karnataka High Court upheld section 22(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, which required deposit of one-half of the disputed tax or amount for maintaining an appeal, and also sustained the stay mechanism under section 22(5). The court held that the provisions operated uniformly, did not create invidious discrimination, and did not infringe Article 19 because they regulated the appellate process rather than prohibiting business activity. The constitutional challenge under Articles 14 and 19 failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 11 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163580