RAJ TRADING COMPANY Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has chequered history. The petitioner-firm M/s. Raj Trading Company, Karnal, submitted return under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973, for the two quarters, i. e. , 3rd and 4th for the assessment year 1978-79. The Assessing Authority passed the order on November 28, 1985 (annexure P-1) holding the assessment to be barred by time. In the meantime, the assessee had deposited about Rs. 1,82,000 which he was entitled to refund. No action having been taken, he approached this Court by way of C. W. P. No. 3282 of 1989. During the pendency of the said writ petition, the State took the stand that penalty proceedings under section 48 of the Act had been initiated, which order was appealable. The writ petition was disposed of since appeal was to be filed. The petitioner filed the appeal and along with the same an application for exemption from paying in advance the amount due which was claimed. This application was rejected vide order dated April 26, 1991 (annexure P-7 ). The matter was further taken to the Tribunal, who affirmed the aforesaid order on June 5, 1991, (annexure P-8 ). This led the petitioner to file the present writ petition.

(2.) Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent, inter alia, taking the stand that without payment of the amount demanded, the appeal could not be disposed of.

(3.) After hearing the counsel for the parties we are of the opinion that in the peculiar facts of the present case, the right of appeal should not be denied to the petitioner for non-deposit of the entire amount being claimed. As per the allegations, the petitioners stopped their business in the year 1979 and six years thereafter the matter was taken up by the Assessing Authority. As already stated above, the assessing authority held the assessment to be barred by time and in the meantime substantial amount had been recovered from the petitioner. We direct that the appeal of the petitioner which is pending before the appellate court against the order passed under section 48 of the Act be now disposed of without insisting the payment of the remaining amount, as substantial amount had already been recovered from the petitioner.