Page 63 - GSTL_21st May 2020_Vol 36_Part 3

2020 ] ASSTT. COMMR. (CT), LTU v. GLAXO SMITH KLINE CONSUMER HEALTH CARE 309
before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner only on 24-9-2018. Section 31 of the
2005 Act provides for the statutory remedy against an assessment order. The
same, as applicable at the relevant time, reads thus : -
“31. (1) Any VAT dealer or TOT dealer or any other dealer objecting to
any order passed or proceeding recorded by any authority under the provi-
sions of the Act other than an order passed or proceeding recorded by an
Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner,
may within thirty days from the date on which the order or proceeding was
served on him, appeal to such authority as may be prescribed :
Provided that the appellate authority may within a further period of
thirty days admit the appeal preferred after a period of thirty days if he is
satisfied that the VAT dealer or TOT dealer or any other dealer had suffi-
cient cause for not preferring the appeal within that period :
Provided further that an appeal so preferred shall not be admitted by
the appellate authority concerned unless the dealer produces the proof of
payment of tax, penalty, interest or any other amount admitted to be due,
or of such instalments as have been granted, and the proof of payment of
twelve and half per cent of the difference of the tax, penalty, interest or any
other amount, assessed by the authority prescribed and the tax, penalty, in-
terest or any other amount admitted by the appellant, for the relevant tax
period, in respect of which the appeal is preferred.
(2) The appeal shall be in such form, and verified in such manner, as may
be prescribed and shall be accompanied by a fee which shall not be less
than Rs. 50/- (Rupees fifty only) but shall not exceed Rs. 1000/- (Rupees
one thousand only) as may be prescribed.
(3) (a) Where an appeal is admitted under sub-section (1), the appellate
authority may, on an application filed by the appellant and subject to fur-
nishing of such security or on payment of such part of the disputed tax
within such time as may be specified, order stay of collection of balance of
the tax under dispute pending disposal of the appeal;
(b) Against an order passed by the appellate authority refusing to order
stay under clause (a), the appellant may prefer a revision petition within
thirty days from the date of the order of such refusal to the Additional
Commissioner or the Joint Commissioner who may subject to such terms
and conditions as he may think fit, order stay of collection of balance of the
tax under dispute pending disposal of the appeal by the appellate authori-
ty;
(c) Notwithstanding anything in clauses (a) or (b), where a VAT dealer or
TOT dealer or any other dealer has preferred an appeal to the Appellate
Tribunal under Section 33, the stay, if any, ordered under clause (b) shall be
operative till the disposal of the appeal by such Tribunal, and, the stay, if
any ordered under clause (a) shall be operative till the disposal of the ap-
peal by such Tribunal, only in case where the Additional Commissioner or
the Joint Commissioner on an application made to him by the dealer in the
prescribed manner, makes specific order to that effect.
(4) The appellate authority may, within a period of two years from the
date of admission of such appeal, after giving the appellant an opportunity
of being heard and subject to such rules as may be prescribed :
(a) confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment or the pen-
alty, or both; or

GST LAW TIMES  21st May 2020  63