2017 (2) TMI 1133

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the fact that, the Assessment Order dated 08.12.2014 has been passed, which has given rise to a demand for tax and penalty. 3. By virtue of the said Assessment Order, the petitioner has been called upon to pay tax, for a sum of Rs. 27,76,416/- and a penalty, equivalent to Rs. 55,52,832/-. The petitioner has thus, been called upon to pay, according to respondents, a total sum of Rs. 79,80,196/-. 3.1. Admittedly, the petitioner has preferred an appeal, with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner [CT], qua order dated 08.12.2014. 3.2. I am informed by the counsel for the petitioner that an application for stay has also been preferred, before the very same authority, which is pending consideration. 4. Insofar as the respondents are concerned,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er of the respondents to withhold Forms C and F, the issuance of which are otherwise, concededly, governed by the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [in short "CST Act"] and the rules framed thereunder, can if at all be sourced in Section 43 of the PVAT. Section 43[1] of PVAT opens with a non-obstante clause, which, inter alia, provides that notwithstanding the fact that any recovery proceeding has been initiated under the said Act, the Assessing Officer or any other officer, authorised in that regard, shall have power to withhold the issuance of statutory or other declaration forms to a dealer from whom any tax or penalty, interest or any other amount payable under the said Act, is due. 7.1. Therefore, the thrust of the said pr....