M/S. S.K.Plywood, Cuttack Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

M/S. S.K.Plywood, Cuttack Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of as covered by the Division Bench order dated 16.02.2024 in WP(C) No.42015 of 2023 (M/s. Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha and others), with modification: deposit required for the impugned First Appellate Authority order dated 25.09.2024 to remain stayed reduced to 10% of remaining disputed tax, to be made accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the First Appellate Authority's order dated 25.09.2024 can be disposed of as covered by the Division Bench order dated 16.02.2024 in WP(C) No.42015 of 2023, with modification reducing the deposit required for the impugned order to remain stayed to 10% of remaining disputed tax pursuant to the State revenue notification dated 29.10.2024.

Court's answer

The Court accepted the petitioner's submission regarding the corresponding notification reducing the requirement of the deposit to 10% of disputed tax for the impugned first appellate order to remain stayed, and directed that the deposit be made accordingly.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of as covered by the order dated 16th February, 2024, with the modification that the deposit for the impugned order to remain stayed is 10% of the remaining disputed tax.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Arindam Sinha, Acting Chief Justice and M.S. Sahoo, Judge) disposed of WP(C) No.32453 of 2024 filed by M/s. S.K. Plywood, Cuttack, aggrieved by the First Appellate Authority's order dated 25.09.2024, as covered by the First Division Bench order dated 16.02.2024 in the batch of writ petitions led by WP(C) No.42015 of 2023 (M/s. Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha and others), with one modification. Since the petitioner wished to appeal to the Tribunal, which had not yet been constituted, and the parties were complying with the earlier directions (deposit of 10% of disputed tax on filing the appeal and further 20% of remaining disputed tax for stay), the Court, on the petitioner's submission that State revenue had notified on 29.10.2024 corresponding to the Central revenue notification dated 16.08.2024, accepted reduction of the deposit required for the impugned first appellate order to remain stayed to 10% of the remaining disputed tax and directed the deposit be made accordingly.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

WP(C) No.32453 of 2024

M/s. S.K. Plywood, …. Petitioner Cuttack

Represented by Adv.Mr. S. Pattanaik, Advocate -versus-

…. State of Odisha and Opposite Parties others

Represented by Adv.Mr. D. Das, Advocate (Additional Standing Counsel)

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO

ORDER

14.02.2025

Order No.

01. 1. Mr. Pattanaik, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and

submits, his client is aggrieved by order dated 25^th September, 2024 made by the First Appellate Authority. It wants to appeal therefrom to the Tribunal but it has not yet been constituted. In the circumstances assessees and the department were complying with directions made on order dated 16^th February, 2024 by the First Division Bench in a batch of writ petitions, lead case being WP(C) no.42015 of 2023 (M/s. Maa Tarini

Traders v. State of Odisha and others) .

Page 1 of 2

The directions included requiring the assessee to deposit 10% of the disputed amount of tax on filing the appeal and further 20% of remaining disputed tax, for the impugned order to be stayed.

He submits, his client is up against State revenue. There was notification dated 16^th August, 2024 made by Central revenue reducing latter deposit to 10%. Now, State revenue has correspondingly notified on 29^th October, 2024. In the circumstances, the writ petition be disposed of as covered by order dated 16^th February, 2024 (supra) with modification for deposit of 10% of remaining disputed tax for impugned order to remain stayed.

Mr. Das, learned advocate, Additional Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State revenue.

We accept submission made on behalf of petitioner regarding corresponding notification reducing requirement of the deposit to 10% of disputed tax for impugned first appellate order to remain stayed. The deposit be made accordingly.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Signature Not Verified

( Arindam Sinha ) Acting Chief Justice

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR SAHOO Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 14-Feb-2025 18:37:07

( M.S. Sahoo ) Judge

Prasant

Page 2 of 2