(Oral)
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 29.5.2019 passed by the respondent no.2 i.e. Member, Commercial Tax, Tribunal Bench-II, Lucknow in Second Appeal No.159 of 2019 and also praying for a writ in the nature of Prohibition, directing the respondent no.4 i.e. Deputy Commissioner-I, Commercial Tax, Sitapur, prohibiting him from initiating and realizing the disputed tax for the Assessment Year 2016-17 during the pendency of the writ petition.
3. This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the basis of the judgments cited in the writ petition itself with regard to the admissibility of its application for 100% waiver of the disputed tax assessment. The Supreme Court in Tecnimont Private Limited vs. State of Punjab, Civil Appeal No.7358 of 2019, decided on 18.9.2019 has held that 100% waiver of pre-deposit condition cannot be granted by the appellate Tribunal. It has distinguished the judgment rendered by it in Income Tax Officer vs. M.K. Mohammad Kunhi AIR 1969 SC 430, which has been relied upon by the petitioner in Para-16 of the writ petition.
4. Already 60% waiver has been granted by the Deputy Commissioner-I, Commercial Tax, Sitapur and the petitioner approached the Appellate Tribunal in Second Appeal with regard to its prayer for grant of complete waiver on the disputed tax. The Appellate Tribunal has considered all the submissions including the submissions made by the petitioner with regard to inadmissibility of the alleged tax dues, but has not found anything wrong in the order passed by the Appeals Court, but looking into the financial condition of the petitioner, has increased the exemption granted by the Appeals Court from 60% to 70%. Now, only 30% of the disputed tax has to be deposited by the petitioner before the respondent no.4.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon several judgments/orders passed by the coordinate Benches of this Court in the year 2011 and 2012. He also says that even in 2018 and 2019, several such orders were passed by the coordinate Benches, reducing the amount of pre-deposit to only 10% and granting 90% waiver during the pendency of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.
6. This Court finds that only for the grant of interim relief, no writ petition is maintainable. The Appeals Court has already been approached in first appeal and against the order of pre-deposit, the petitioner had approached the Appellate Tribunal also, which on consideration of all facts of the case, reduced the condition of pre-deposit further and granted exemption of 70% on the tax amount due. The writ petition cannot be entertained by this Court, granting any further relief during the pendency of either the second appeal or the first appeal before the court concerned.
7. This Court does not find any good ground to show any interference in the matter.
8. The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 Sachin