JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 10th day of March 2022)

Basant Balaji J. , The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order in I.N.T.P.

No.160 of 2021 in T.A.(VAT) No.119 of 2021 dated 6.12.2021 of Kerala Value Added Tax/ Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode, wherein the Tribunal has granted an additional order of stay of recovery proceedings, provided the petitioner depositing 30% of the disputed demand and also on furnishing security bond in Form 6A for the balance amount within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

2. The main contention raised in this O.P.(Tax) is that the 2nd respondent after finding that there is a prima facie case in favour of the petitioner and also finding that continuation of the recovery proceedings will cause irreparable loss and hardship, ought not have directed deposit of 30% of the disputed amount.

3. Heard the learned counsel Smt.Meera V Menon for the petitioner and the learned senior Government Pleader, Shri.V K Shamsudheen.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the first appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)-I, the petitioner has remitted 25% of the tax due for enjoying stay. But, the Tribunal while considering the stay application has not taken into consideration the above mentioned payment amount to Rs.93,460/-. She submits that after entering a finding that there is a prima facie case, the condition to deposit 30% is wrong.

5. The petitioner has already remitted 25% of the tax due before the first appellate authority. The Tribunal has granted stay on condition of depositing 30% of the disputed demand. We take note of the fact that deposit of 25% of the amount is substantial compliance of the order passed by the Tribunal though the Tribunal has directed to deposit 30% of tax. It is to be noted that the deposit made by the petitioner was before the order of stay order was passed by the Tribunal. In the said circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the deposit of 25% is substantial compliance of the order passed by the Tribunal and we modify the order of the Tribunal to the extent that the percentage of the amount to be deposited as 25% in place of 30%.

This O.P.(Tax) is disposed of as above.

sd S.V.BHATTI, JUDGE sd BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE dl/

APPENDIX OF OP (TAX) 13/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE MONTH JULY 2012.

Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), PALAKKAD.

Exhibit P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 COPY OF ORDER IN T(VAT) NO.119/21 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 COPY OF JUDGMENT IN OP(TAX) NO.1/2022 IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA.