Summary
The Court held that payments made under protest before assessment must be considered toward the statutory pre-deposit for a tax appeal. Section 26(6A) required ten per cent of the tax disputed, rather than a fresh deposit calculated on arrears after excluding earlier payments. The statute contained no exclusion for pre-assessment protest payments. The tax appeal was restored subject to verification that the required deposit had been made; the substantive assessment was not decided.
Issues
- Whether pre-assessment payments under protest could count toward the mandatory appellate pre-deposit.
- Whether Section 26(6A) required a fresh deposit on outstanding arrears despite those payments.
Provisions considered
- Section 26(6A), Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002The ten per cent requirement concerns tax disputed by the appellant; the text does not exclude protest payments made before assessment. (¶¶ 8, 11, 12)
Held
- The entire undisputed amount and ten per cent of disputed tax must be deposited. Since the appellant disputed the entire tax demand, the ten per cent requirement applied to that disputed liability, with prior protest payments counted toward compliance. (¶ 11)
- A taxing statute must be applied according to its plain language. Neither the requirement to furnish proof of payment nor adjustment of earlier payments against assessed liability justified reading into the provision a requirement for a fresh deposit that excluded those payments. (¶¶ 11, 12)
- The appeal’s rejection was improper. Restoration was subject to verification that ten per cent of the disputed tax had been deposited when prior protest payments were taken into account. (¶¶ 12, 13)
Result
Appeal allowed subject to verification of the required deposit. The High Court judgment was set aside and the tax appeal restored to the appellate authority; pending application disposed of.