https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388304 A payment made under protest before completion of assessment did not satisfy the mandatory pre-deposit requirement for filing a first appeal under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act. The pre-deposit under Section 26(6A) was treated as a condition precedent, to be measured against the tax disputed in the assessment order under challenge, and an earlier investigation-stage payment later adjusted in the demand could not be equated with that statutory deposit. The appeal condition could not be diluted by treating the protest payment as compliance, so the challenge to the further deposit requirement failed. en-us Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Oct 2020 11:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388304 A payment made under protest before completion of assessment did not satisfy the mandatory pre-deposit requirement for filing a first appeal under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act. The pre-deposit under Section 26(6A) was treated as a condition precedent, to be measured against the tax disputed in the assessment order under challenge, and an earlier investigation-stage payment later adjusted in the demand could not be equated with that statutory deposit. The appeal condition could not be diluted by treating the protest payment as compliance, so the challenge to the further deposit requirement failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388304