SAMAY SALES Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a proprietary concern. Petitioner has challenged action of the respondents authorities in insisting deposit of certain pre-deposits, pending petitioner's appeal against an order of assessment.

(2.) Brief facts are that against the petitioner and one M/s. Dharampal Satyapal Limited, a common order of assessment came to be passed by the VAT authorities confirming sizeable outstanding demand of tax with interest and penalty. The petitioner has preferred appeals against such directions. Pending such appeals, as the petitioner requested for stay, the appellate authority by impugned order dated 22nd March 2018 insisted that the petitioner must deposit 25% of Rs. 23,38,61,256/= ie., Rs. 5,84,65,314/= by 9th April 2018 failing which the petitioner's application would be dismissed. Though it had been specifically stated in the order, since there is reference to Section 73 [4] of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, it would mean that if the petitioner fails to deposit such amount, automatically even the appeal would not be entertained.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the authorities have passed illegal order. He submitted that the assessment order itself could not have been passed against the petitioner since all transactions, if according to the Department were of M/s. Dharampal Satyapal Limited, the petitioner - as an alleged agent of M/s. Dharampal Satyapal Limited cannot be asked to pay any amount of tax, when the transactions do not concern the petitioner. Counsel submitted that the petitioner's immovable properties have been under attachment by the Department. From M/s. Dharampal Satyapal Limited, the Department has not collected any tax or even imposed condition of pre-deposit though the appeals were filed by the said entity long time back. If any amount on the other hand is collected from M/s. Dharampal Satyapal Limited by way of pre-deposit, collecting the same from the petitioner would only be duplication.