https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397434 Pending disposal of the first appeal, the Court directed complete stay of recovery of the disputed tax demand, finding that partial protection was not sufficient in the circumstances. The assessee had argued that continuation of the assessment proceedings was barred after the assessment year under section 29(6) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008, and the assessment had earlier been recalled under section 32. The Court found substance in the questions of law raised and accepted that the disputed recovery should remain stayed while the first appeal was pending, for up to four months or until disposal of the appeal, whichever was earlier. en-us Mon, 06 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Aug 2020 10:17:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397434 Pending disposal of the first appeal, the Court directed complete stay of recovery of the disputed tax demand, finding that partial protection was not sufficient in the circumstances. The assessee had argued that continuation of the assessment proceedings was barred after the assessment year under section 29(6) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008, and the assessment had earlier been recalled under section 32. The Court found substance in the questions of law raised and accepted that the disputed recovery should remain stayed while the first appeal was pending, for up to four months or until disposal of the appeal, whichever was earlier. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 06 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397434