V. Ratnam, J.
1. This writ petition, after service of notice of motion, is admitted, and at the request of learned Counsel on both sides, the hearing of the writ petition is advanced.
2. Pending disposal of an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Madurai, the petitioner prayed for stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs. 81,216/- Penalty of Rs. 40,403/-Additional Sales Tax of Rs. 14,216/- and a Surcharge of Rs. 4,060/- totalling to Rs. 1,39,895/- stated to be due and recoverable from the petitioner in respect of the assessment year 1981-82 under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The petitioner had furnished Bank Guarantee No. 21/9, dated 4.12,1984 for the entire tax liability of Rs. 1,39,8957/-, and prayed that stay of collection of the tax and the penalty may be granted. However, the Tribunal was of the view that the Bank Guarantee furnished by the petitioner is good enough, but nevertheless purporting to exercise what is styled as its discretionary powers, it directed the petitioner to pay the disputed tax, penalty, additional sales tax and surcharge in six equal monthly instalments with effect from 25.3.1985 onwards. The order thus passed by the Tribunal provides double safeguards in respect of the tax liability of the petitioner, that is a Bank Guarantee for the entire disputed tax, penalty, additional sales tax etc., as well as the actual payment of the tax itself by the petitioner in instalments. That cannot, however, be done, as the petitioner cannot be asked to provide safeguards twice over with reference to the same liability. On a consideration of these facts and circumstances of the case, it would suffice if the Bank Guarantee which had been accepted by the Tribunal is allowed to remain in force during the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal, as that by itself would be sufficient to safeguard any claim of the Department against the petitioner in respect of the tax etc., and further payments of the disputed tax etc., in instalments, would be wholly unnecessary. In his view, the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.P. No. 17 of 1985, dated 28.2.1985 is quashed and the writ petition is allowed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.