https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425053 The Bombay High Court upheld the State's competence to amend the MVAT Act after the 101st Constitutional Amendment and to impose a mandatory 10% pre-deposit for appeals against assessment orders. It held that the statutory right of appeal may be regulated by legislative conditions so long as the remedy is not rendered illusory or unconstitutional. The Court also treated the 2019 explanation to Section 26 as clarificatory, applying it to appeals from orders passed on or after 15 April 2017, and held that the earlier contrary view in Anshul Impex did not state the law correctly. The amended appellate scheme was therefore sustained as valid. en-us Tue, 12 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jun 2023 15:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425053 The Bombay High Court upheld the State's competence to amend the MVAT Act after the 101st Constitutional Amendment and to impose a mandatory 10% pre-deposit for appeals against assessment orders. It held that the statutory right of appeal may be regulated by legislative conditions so long as the remedy is not rendered illusory or unconstitutional. The Court also treated the 2019 explanation to Section 26 as clarificatory, applying it to appeals from orders passed on or after 15 April 2017, and held that the earlier contrary view in Anshul Impex did not state the law correctly. The amended appellate scheme was therefore sustained as valid. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 12 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425053