AKIL KURESHI,J. - (1.)This petition is filed by an assessee. He has challenged a communication dated 18.10.2019 from the Superintendent of Taxes, Agartala requiring him to pay up an entire amount of Rs. 11,79,203 which was a demand of tax with penalties. The petitioner would point out that under the order of assessment dated 30.03.2019 the Assessing Officer has for the assessment period of 2013-2014 raised the said demand of Rs. 11,79,203 which includes the basic tax with penalties. Against the said order of assessment, the petitioner has preferred the revision petition in terms of Section 70 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (the VAT Act, for short). He also pointed out that he has already deposited the entire amount of penalty of Rs. 3,13,828 despite which the authorities are seeking to recover the whole amount of the tax with penalty.
(2.)Learned Advocate General would submit that in terms of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 70 of the VAT Act, an assessee must deposit 50% of the disputed tax and penalty demands only subject to which the revision petition would be maintainable and further recoveries may be stayed pending outcome of such revision petition. He submitted that the decision of learned Single Judge in case of M/S Freight Carrier (India) (P.) Ltd. vrs. State of Tripura and others reported in (2011) 2 GLR 80 which takes a contrary view requires reconsideration.
(3.)Section 70 of the VAT Act pertains to the revisional powers of the Commissioner. Under sub-section (1) of Section 70 the Commissioner has the power to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and take it as a revision if he finds that the order is erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Under sub-section (2) of Section 70 an aggrieved assessee would likewise urge the Commissioner to exercise his revisional powers against any order passed by person subordinate to the Commissioner. Proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 70 reads as under:
"70. Revision by Commissioner:

(2) xxx xxx xxx Provided that no petition for revision by a dealer or a transporter shall be admitted by the Commissioner unless at least fifty percent of the amount of tax assessed, or as the case may be, fifty percent of the amount of penalty levied, has been paid by the dealer or the transporter where the order against which revision is filed relates to assessment of tax or imposition of penalty."

As per this proviso, no petition for revision by a dealer or a transporter would be admitted by the Commissioner unless at least 50% of the amount of tax assessed, or the penalty levied as the case may be has been paid by the dealer or the transporter. A learned Single Judge of Gauhati High Court had interpreted the said provision as to mean that the requirement of paying 50% of the tax or penalty would be satisfied as long as 50% of either the tax or the penalty is paid. The learned Advocate General may be justified in arguing that the said decision requires reconsideration. Everything would boil out to the interpretation of the proviso to sub-section (2) of the Section 70 of the Act. We would undertake such exercise in an appropriate case. In the present case, the petitioner has already deposited the entire penalty amount which though not equivalent to 50% of the total amount of tax and penalty, the difference is not considerable. Looking to the smallness of the amount involved, we are not reopening the issues decided by the learned Single Judge in case of M/S Freight Carrier (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra).

;