TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 603
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Tax Tribunal, whereby it ordered the pre-deposit of tax of Rs. 7,12,00,000/- on the basis of the Revision order in Revision Application No. 44 of 2021 and in the matter of Second Appeal No. 579 of 2021. 2. The Tribunal, infact, had decided the Revision Petition at an interim stage and issued the direction to pay such a huge amount within a period of one month. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that it has a good case on merit and the orders of the Assessing Officer and the First Appellate Authority are based on assumption and presumption and lacks the factual basis. 3. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('the VAT Act' hereinafter) and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ('the CST Act' her....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y Commissioner (Appeals) who granted the stay against the recovery of deposit by deposit of partial amount of Rs. 30,75,000/- against the total demand and the stay was granted. 3.4 The said authority canceled the stay order and passed a fresh order on 12.07.2021 and directed to pay the balance sum of total demanded amount of Rs. 26,20,35,862/-. The First Appellate Authority issued notice on 23.08.2021 in Form 503 and sought to revise the assessment. The Revision order was passed on 24.08.2021 and the total demand was enhanced to Rs.31,36,62,495/- and ordered the Assessing Authority to initiate recovery proceedings. 3.5 Thereafter, Second Appeal No. 579 of 2021 was preferred and the Revision Application No.44 of 2021 was preferred. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ication no 44 of 2021 and Second Appeal no 579 of 2021 on merits without Pre-deposit of Rs. 7.12 Crores. (D) Pending admission hearing and final disposal of this petition Lordships, may be pleased to grant interim as well as Ad-interim reliefs and thereby stay the recovery as well as all the recover proceedings for the AY 2015-16 by the respondent authorities. (E) Your Lordships may kindly be pleased to pass any other further orders as deemed fit just and proper in the facts of the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice." 5. On issuance of notice the respondents appeared. This Court while passing an order on 09.03.2022 directed the learned AGP to take instructions as to what type of property has been a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... yd.). The outstanding dues of the Bank reduced to Rs. 42,16,294/- as per the statement prepared on 01.02.2022. There has been a substantial decrease in the outstanding dues of the Bank. It appears that the property which has been attached values to the tune of Rs. 61,55,29,000/- (rounded off). The liability of the petitioner as per the Bank statement is to the tune of Rs.42,00,000/-. The Bank has already created a lien over the property and therefore, the State is desirous of creating a second charge noticing the possible tax demand, penalty and interest. 8. As is apparent from the chronology of events, the Second Appeal No.579 of 2021 is pending and the base order is passed ex-parte with the property being in attachment of the State a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... amount of pre-deposit. 11. Noticing the fact that the base order has been passed exparte and thereafter, the challenge had been made to the First Appellate Authority and then there is a pendency of Second Appeal before the Second Appellate Authority, the matter would require adjudication at the hands of the Appellate Forum and at the same time the requirement of deposit of predeposits in accordance with the law as quantified by the First Appellate Authority is already deposited before the Authority concerned. Without endorsing to the action of the Tribunal the amount of Rs.7.12 Crore directed to be deposited as predeposit may not be insisted upon in wake of these glaring facts, the property which is attached is valued at Rs.61 Crore and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me. 15. The Tribunal directed the payment of Rs.7.12 Crore towards the pre-deposit within a period of one month. While considering this aspect, the Tribunal has over-looked the fact that the petitioner never had an opportunity to argue this case and the matter had proceeded ex-parte even when the base order was passed. It is averred to be presumptive in nature by the petitioner in the present petition as well as in the Appeals preferred before the First and the Second Appellate Authorities. Therefore, to direct the amount of Rs.7.12 Crore as pre-deposits surely would warrant interference of this Court. 16. Resultantly, this petition is allowed. The amount of predeposit, which has already been deposited by virtue of the First Appellate....