Skip to content


Gangadhar Ramchand and anr. Vs. the Sales Tax Tribunal and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 317 of 1982
Judge
Reported in[1983]54STC129(All)
AppellantGangadhar Ramchand and anr.
RespondentThe Sales Tax Tribunal and ors.
Appellant AdvocateBharatji Agrawal, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateStanding Counsel
DispositionPetition allowed
Excerpt:
- .....order dated 17th april, 1982, passed by the member, sales tax tribunal, agra, directing the stay application filed on behalf of assessee to be placed before a bench consisting of two members on 4th may, 1982. this direction obviously was made because the amount of tax involved was more than rs. 5,000. a reading of section 10(10) read with rule 69(5) makes it clear that the restriction of hearing of appeal by a bench consisting of two members is only in respect of appeals. it does not apply to stay application. sub-rule (5) of rule 69 reads as under :an application for stay under section 10(6) may be heard and disposed of irrespective of the amount involved.2. in view of this provision the stay application of the assessee could have been decided by the single member and it was not.....
Judgment:

R.M. Sahai, J.

1. This petition is directed against order dated 17th April, 1982, passed by the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, Agra, directing the stay application filed on behalf of assessee to be placed before a Bench consisting of two members on 4th May, 1982. This direction obviously was made because the amount of tax involved was more than Rs. 5,000. A reading of Section 10(10) read with Rule 69(5) makes it clear that the restriction of hearing of appeal by a Bench consisting of two members is only in respect of appeals. It does not apply to stay application. Sub-rule (5) of Rule 69 reads as under :

An application for stay under Section 10(6) may be heard and disposed of irrespective of the amount involved.

2. In view of this provision the stay application of the assessee could have been decided by the single member and it was not necessary to direct it to be listed before a Bench consisting of two members.

3. In the circumstances this petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 17th April, 1982, passed by the Tribunal is quashed. The single member of the Tribunal shall now dispose of the stay application filed by the assessee in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //