2021 (11) TMI 172

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....For the Revisionist : Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel. For the Respondent : Mr. Tarun Lakera and Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, learned Brief Holder for the State. JUDGMENT : PER HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN The revisionist has challenged the order, dated 09.09.2021, passed by the learned Commercial Tax Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short), in Second Appeal No. 9 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gar value at the sum of Rs. 57,11,97,296/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the revisionist had preferred a First Appeal, and had also moved an application for stay of the demand amount. 3. Meanwhile, the revisionist had also challenged the constitutional validity of the Uttarakhand Tax on Entry of Goods Into Local Areas Act, 2008 before this Court. The said petition is still pending before ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... revisionist, has pleaded as under:- Firstly since the constitutional validity of the Uttarakhand Tax on Entry of Goods Into Local Areas Act, 2008 is subjudice before this High Court, the demand should have been stayed 100% both by the learned Joint Commissioner and by the learned Tribunal. Secondly, the learned Tribunal has erred in relying on Section 53(8) of the Act, for Section 53(8) of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t at least 40% of the demand amount. In fact, the law bestows a discretionary power on the Joint Commissioner to decide as to how much of the demand amount should be stayed by him. Since it is the discretionary power, which has been validly exercised, the learned Tribunal was justified in upholding the order passed by the learned Joint Commissioner. 8. The learned counsel for the revisionist is....