INDIAN BANK Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING Exts. P1(a) and P1 (b) assessment orders, in respect the assessment years 2006 -'07 and 2007 -'08, the petitioner has preferred Exts. P3 (a) and (b) appeals, which are pending consideration before the second respondent. Pursuant to the hearing hearing held on the interlocutory application for stay, the second respondent passed Ext. P4 order on 12.7.2010, whereby the further coercive proceedings caused to be stayed, on condition that, the petitioner deposited 1/3rd of the disputed liability and furnished security for the balance amount before the assessing authority within two weeks. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, the condition imposed by the appellate authority is not correct or sustainable and many a ground has been raised in the Writ Petition as to the merits involved.

(2.) THE learned Government Pleader submits that, the case projected by the petitioner in the memorandum of appeal has very well been looked into by the appellate authority while passing Ext. P3 interim order and the merits have been discussed in detail. After taking note of the entire facts and circumstances, the appellate authority granted interim stay, subject to the condition, which is not arbitrary or a burden to the petitioner, who is a public sector Bank.

(3.) IN the above circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India. The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed. However, taking note of the fact that, the time stipulated vide Ext. P4 is already over, the petitioner is permitted to have two weeks' time to comply with the condition imposed vide Ext. P4.