JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this court challenging Exts.P9 and P10 in so far as it relate to furnishing of 60% of balance disputed tax. He seeks a direction to accept Exts.P13 and P13(a) bonds towards security. Exts.P9 and P10 are orders passed by the appellate authority in appeals filed by the petitioner against the assessment orders for the years 2005-2006 and 2007-2008. By the orders the appellate authority has granted stay on condition that the petitioner remits 40% of the balance amount due and furnishes security for the balance to the satisfaction of the assessing authority. Petitioner refers to Exts.P13 and P13(a) security bonds. Complaint of the petitioner is that though they were accepted by the second respondent, they were subsequently returned on the ground that he is not satisfied with the bonds furnished as no solvency certificates of the sureties are enclosed. The second respondent has advised the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee. It is the complaint of the petitioner that this refusal lands the petitioner in the lurch of making payment of 100% of the disputed tax. The petitioner is stated to be facing very stringent financial position, especially after the