Each of the assessees preferred a revision petition before the High Court.
The respondents in each of these cases was subjected to assessment under the U.P. Sales Tax Act.
C. Manchanda and A.K. Srivastava for the Appellant.
From the Judgment and Order dated 13.3.
The assessment years are different for the three cases being assessment years 1981 82, 1983 84 and 198283 respectively but this does number make any material difference.
In the third he directed the assessee to deposit 10 of the disputed tax within ten days from the, date of the order.
1987 27.2.1989 of the Allahabad High Court in S.T.R. Nos.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
But the first appel late authority, in two of the cases, dismissed the applica tion.
1465 of 1990.
In each of the cases, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first appellate authori ty and, along with the appeal, moved an application praying for the waiver of any deposit of tax which was necessary before the appeal companyld be entertained.
Notices of these petitions have been duly sent but there is numberappearance on behalf of the respondents.
Dis satisfied with the orders of the first appellate authority, 1033 each of the assessees preferred an appeal to the Tribunal.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATHAN, J. These three Special Leave Petitions can be disposed of together as they involve a companymon point.
After hearing the companynsel for the petitioner we grant leave and also proceed to dispose of the appeals.
522/86, 202/89 203 of 1989.
