https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372240 On payment of 20% of the disputed tax under the proviso to section 55(4) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the authorities could not insist on any further security as a condition for stay of recovery. The provision was treated as clear and self-contained, requiring only that statutory remittance to suspend further recovery proceedings until the appeal was disposed of. Once that condition was met, there was no basis to demand an additional solvency certificate or bond. The recovery demand was therefore not sustainable to that extent, and the impugned demand was modified in favour of the petitioner. en-us Wed, 08 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Dec 2018 06:10:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372240 On payment of 20% of the disputed tax under the proviso to section 55(4) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the authorities could not insist on any further security as a condition for stay of recovery. The provision was treated as clear and self-contained, requiring only that statutory remittance to suspend further recovery proceedings until the appeal was disposed of. Once that condition was met, there was no basis to demand an additional solvency certificate or bond. The recovery demand was therefore not sustainable to that extent, and the impugned demand was modified in favour of the petitioner. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 08 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372240