TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 629
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner has taken an exception to the order dated 13th October, 2017 passed by the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal at Mumbai, on an application for stay filed by the petitioner in two VAT second appeals. The impugned demands which are subject matter of the pending appeals before the Sales Tax Tribunal are in the sum of Rs. 14,61,31,580/and Rs. 25,01,74,230/respectively. These demands include tax, interest and penalty. The Tribunal allowed the stay application by passing the following operative order: " Stay application is allowed; however subject to deposit of part payment as under: - Appeal No. Part Payment Amount Fixed (in Rs.) Installments (in Rs.) Date of Payment VAT SA 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "An appeal shall lie to the High Court from every order passed by the Tribunal including a judgment by way of advance ruling, if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law." 4 In the present case, the order impugned has been passed on the application for stay made by the petitioner in the pending appeals. While deciding such application, no issue could be finally decided or concluded and only a prima facie consideration of the controversy involved in the appeal is required to be made with a view to ascertain whether the appellant has made out a prima facie case. 5 Sub-section (1) of Section 27 of the said Act of 2002, on the face of it gives an impression that an appeal will lie to this Court fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt from every order passed in appeal by the Appellate Tribunal, if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law." The issue was whether an appeal under Section 260A was maintainable against an order declining to permit the appellant to raise additional grounds in the memorandum of appeal before the Tribunal. In paragraphs 4 and 5, the Division Bench held thus: " 4. The expressions "every order passed in appeal" cannot be construed to take in its fold all interlocutory orders that may be passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, during the pendency of the appeal, particularly such orders which are procedural in nature. By use of the expression "every order passed in appeal", the legislature....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shall lie from every order of the Controller made under this Act to the Rent Control Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) consisting of one person only to be appointed by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette." (emphasis added) In paragraph 3 and 4, the Apex Court held thus: "3. The object of Section 38(1) is to give a right of appeal to a party aggrieved by some order which affects his right or liability. In the context of Section 38(1), the words "every order of the Controller made under this Act", though very wide, do not include interlocutory orders, which are merely procedural and do not affect the rights or liabilities of the parties. In a pending proceeding, the Controller m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther statutes conferring rights of appeal. Section 202 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 confers a right of appeal "from any order or decision made or given in the matter of the winding up of a company by the court". In Shankarlal Aggarwal v. Shankarlal Poddar [[1964] 1 SCR 717, 736] this court decided that these words, though wide, would exclude merely procedural orders or those which did not affect the rights or liabilities of parties." (emphasis added) 9 The decision in the case of Shankarlal Aggarwal is by a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court. In our view, what is held by the Apex Court and this Court will squarely apply to the provisions of sub-section( 1) of Section 27 of the said Act of 2002 and an interlocutory or a pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Perusal of the impugned interim order and in particular paragraph 6 onwards show that the issue of existence of prima facie case has been addressed by the Tribunal. Though the Tribunal did not accept the contention that a prima facie case has been made out, as stated earlier, substantial relief has been granted by the Tribunal to the petitioner. According to us, there is no perversity in the impugned order which is of discretionary and equitable in nature. 13 The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the installments fixed under the impugned order may be converted into monthly installments. We propose to accede to the request made by the petitioner. However, the first installment in both the cases will have to be p....