High CourtsSingle Bench(2019) 09 MAD CK 0060

M.S.K.Tex (P) Ltd vs State Tax Officer And Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 23 September 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.Ravichandrabaabu, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 27747, 27751, 27753, 27754, 27757, 27759, 27760 Of 2019 WMP. No. 27279, 27280, 27282, 27283, 27286, 27289, 27281 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 352 words

K.Ravichandrabaabu, J

1.

The petitioner is one and the same in all these writ petitions. The petitioner is aggrieved against the orders of the second respondent dated 31.07.2019, passed in respect of the assessment years 2009-2010 to 2015-2016, wherein and whereby, the second respondent, while granting stay pending disposal of the appeals, imposed a condition by directing the petitioner to file sufficient security by way of bank guarantee or immovable property for the stayed amount in each assessment year.

2.

Heard both sides.

3.

It is seen that in respect of the assessment years 2009-2010 to 2015-2016, orders of assessment were passed by the Assessing Officer on 07.12.2018. Challenging the said orders, the petitioner preferred appeals before the First Appellate Authority, namely the 2nd respondent. They also prayed for interim stay of the demand, pending disposal of the appeals. The second respondent/ Appellate Authority, while considering and granting stay, imposed the above condition.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner has already paid the admitted tax amount and that the Appellate Authority also stayed for collecting the remaining tax and penalty till the disposal of the Appeal or six months from the date, whichever is earlier, again directing the petitioner to furnish the Bank guarantee for the stayed amount causes undue hardship. Therefore, he submitted that instead of furnishing bank guarantee, the petitioner will give personal bond to the stayed amount in each assessment year. He also invited this Court's attention to the order passed in W.P.No.27455 of 2019 dated 16.09.2019, in similar case, wherein this Court modified the order of stay granted by the Appellate Authority by permitting the petitioner therein to furnish personal bond instead of bank guarantee.

5.

Considering the above stated facts and circumstances and in view of the earlier orders passed by this Court in similar matters, these Writ Petitions are disposed of by modifying the orders of the second respondent only insofar as Clause (iii) therein as follows:

The petitioner shall furnish personal bond for the stayed amount in each assessment year, before the Assessing Officer within a period of two weeks