TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1727X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f law and facts are involved in both the revisions, they are being decided by a common order. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel. Through these revisions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, the applicant has assailed the order dated 26.2.2011 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Bench-I, Lucknow. Applicant-M/s Simla Gomti Pan Products engaged i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal before the Trade Tax Tribunal Bench-I, Lucknow. The Tribunal, vide order dated 26.2.2011, partly allowed the appeal and modified the order dated 1.2.2011 passed by the Additional Commissioner to the effect that 70% of the disputed tax shall remain stayed during the pendency of the first appeal. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant preferred these revisions inter alia on the grounds that the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and the order should be passed after proper application of sound principles for exercising discretion and the application of stay should be treated casually and the authority should not pass the routine order. In support of the aforesaid submissions, learned Counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Income Tax Officer Versus M.K. Mohammad Kunhi [A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncial condition of the applicant. Further, the appellate authority is required to consider the relevant factor like financial hardship and other relevant facts because the condition of deposit will make the purpose of filing of appeal itself nugatory. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, revisions are partly allowed. The order 26.2.2011 passed by the Tribunal is modifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
