https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164001 A newly introduced pre-deposit requirement under the Orissa VAT framework, as applied to appeals under the Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, was treated as prospective because it made the right of appeal more onerous. Rule 22 allowed application of the VAT Act only where the CST rules were silent on procedural or incidental matters, and the amendment notified on July 6, 2006 could not be applied retrospectively absent clear legislative intent. The deposit requirement was therefore confined to the post-amendment period, and any rejection of the appeal for non-compliance on the basis of the entire assessment period was unsustainable. en-us Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Nov 2014 21:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164001 A newly introduced pre-deposit requirement under the Orissa VAT framework, as applied to appeals under the Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, was treated as prospective because it made the right of appeal more onerous. Rule 22 allowed application of the VAT Act only where the CST rules were silent on procedural or incidental matters, and the amendment notified on July 6, 2006 could not be applied retrospectively absent clear legislative intent. The deposit requirement was therefore confined to the post-amendment period, and any rejection of the appeal for non-compliance on the basis of the entire assessment period was unsustainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164001