IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5570 of 2011 M/s. President Trade and Exim Corporation & Anr. .. Petitioner. versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents. ..... Mr. Ratan Kumar Samal for the Petitioner. Mr. Vinay A. Sonpal, A Panel Counsel for Respondent No. 1. ...... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & A. A. SAYED, JJ. 10 October 2011. P.C. : The Sales Tax Tribunal by its order dated 31 March 2011 as modified an order passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Sales Tax (Appeals) by which the Petitioner was directed to make part payment of the tax liability to the extent of Rs. 1.75 lacs, Rs. 45 lacs and Rs. 16 lacs for the Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08. The Tribunal has directed the Petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 50,000/- for the Assessment Year 2005-06, Rs. 4 lacs for the Assessment Year 2006-07 and Rs. 4.50 lacs for the Assessment Year 2007-08 instead and in place of the amount directed to be deposited by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Appeals). 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submitted that for the Assessment Year 2007-08 the Petitioner is entitled to a refund of approximately Rs. 27.74 lacs and, therefore, no order of deposit was warranted. The Tribunal has duly taken note of the fact that for the Assessment Year 2007-08 there is a refund to the extent of Rs. 27.74 lacs. The Tribunal, however, had due regard to the total tax liability for the Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 which is about Rs., 1.43 crores. Hence, even after taking into account a refund of Rs. 27.74 lacs for the Assessment Year 2007-08, the direction for deposit of an amount of Rs. 9 lacs for the remaining two years cannot be regarded as arbitrary or contrary to law. The submission which the Petitioner has on merits is that the Petitioner is entitled to a set off and that the provisions contained in Section 48 (2) read with Section 48 (5) would not be attracted. The merits of the submission would be considered by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Appeals) when the appeal is taken up. At this stage even considering the amount of refund due, the direction to deposit an amount of Rs. 9 lacs, does not warrant interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. However, time to deposit the amount is extended by a further period of three weeks. 3. Subject to the aforesaid, the Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) (A. A. Sayed, J.)