Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesOrissa High Court Stays Rs. 18.45 Lakh Entry Tax Penalty Against Tata...

Orissa High Court Stays Rs. 18.45 Lakh Entry Tax Penalty Against Tata Play

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Orissa High Court has granted interim relief to Tata Play Limited by staying recovery of an Entry Tax penalty of ₹18.45 lakh while directing the company to pay the disputed tax and interest component in three installments. 

The bench of Justice Savitri Ratho and Justice V. Narasingh has also requested the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal to dispose of the pending second appeal expeditiously, preferably by the end of August 2026.

The case arose from a writ petition filed by M/s Tata Play Limited (formerly Tata Sky Limited) challenging an order of the Commissioner of Sales Tax rejecting its request for stay of demand during the pendency of a second appeal before the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal. The dispute relates to proceedings under the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999.

Tata Play contended that denial of stay would cause serious prejudice and virtually render the pending second appeal before the Tribunal infructuous. The company argued that coercive recovery during the pendency of the appeal would defeat the purpose of pursuing appellate remedies.

On the other hand, the State authorities opposed the writ petition, arguing that the company did not have a prima facie case and therefore was not entitled to any interim protection. The Revenue relied upon the Commissioner’s order rejecting the stay application and sought dismissal of the writ petition.

The Court examined the demand notice issued under the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999, which pertained to the tax period from 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2014. The notice quantified the total demand at ₹66.66 lakh, comprising tax of ₹8.83 lakh, interest of ₹39.57 lakh and penalty of ₹18.45 lakh. The demand had been determined through an order dated 31 August 2021.

While refraining from commenting on the merits of the dispute because the matter was already pending before the Tribunal, the High Court considered the statutory framework under Section 7(5) read with Section 16(4) of the Orissa Entry Tax Act. After evaluating the rival submissions and materials on record, the Bench concluded that the interests of justice would be served by granting conditional protection to the petitioner.

The Court directed Tata Play to pay the tax and interest amounts in three equal installments. The first installment is due on 30 June 2026, the second on 15 July 2026, and the third on 30 July 2026. Before determining the exact installment amounts, the Revenue authorities were directed to consider Tata Play’s claim regarding payments already made towards tax and interest, as reflected in documents annexed to the writ petition.

The High Court ordered that upon such deposits being made, recovery of the penalty amount would remain stayed until the disposal of the second appeal by the Tribunal. This effectively shields the company from immediate recovery proceedings in respect of the penalty component while the appellate challenge remains pending.

Taking note that the second appeal is presently pending before a Single Bench of the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal, the Court requested the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably by the end of August 2026. The parties were also directed to cooperate in ensuring timely disposal of the proceedings.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Read More: S. 37 NDPS Act Not Attracted as Seized Quantity of Ganja Was Intermediate, Not Commercial: Telangana High Court Grants Bail

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 18 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for September 18, 2026.GSTMADRAS HIGH COURT QUASHES GST CLASSIFICATION...

Dept’s Stand on Export Quota Premium, Rejects CBDT O.M. to Extend S. 80HHC Benefit

The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of civil appeals concerning the tax treatment...

Conditional Court Deposit Doesn’t Stop Interest: Supreme Court  Calls for Uniform Rules on Litigation Deposits

The Supreme Court of India has held that a deposit made by an award-debtor...

Circumstantial Evidence Failed to Form Complete Chain: Supreme Court Acquits 4 Murder Accused 

The Supreme Court has acquitted four accused persons in a 2001 murder case from...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 18 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for September 18, 2026.GSTMADRAS HIGH COURT QUASHES GST CLASSIFICATION...

Dept’s Stand on Export Quota Premium, Rejects CBDT O.M. to Extend S. 80HHC Benefit

The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of civil appeals concerning the tax treatment...

Conditional Court Deposit Doesn’t Stop Interest: Supreme Court  Calls for Uniform Rules on Litigation Deposits

The Supreme Court of India has held that a deposit made by an award-debtor...