DWIVEDI, J. - (1.) M /s. Hari Chand Rattan Chand and Co., the petitioner, was assessed to sales tax for 1956-57 on 25th July, 1958; and for 1957-58 on 4th February, 1959. Notices of demand were served but the taxes were not paid; instead, appeals were filed. Those appeals were decided on 10th December, 1969. The amount of tax was reduced for each year. Thereafter no fresh notices of demand have ever been issued to the petitioner. But on 23rd February, 1970, the Sales Tax Officer has demanded from the petitioner a sum of Rs. 13,904.97 as interest on the reduced amount of taxes with effect from 1st February, 1964. This demand is questioned before us.
(2.) THE grounds of challenge are two : (1) recovery of tax having been stayed pending appeals, there was no default in payment of tax; (2) there was no fresh notice of demand after the appellate order. We, do not entertain the first ground. It appears from the petition that after filing appeals the petitioner obtained from the Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, an order staying realisation of fifty per cent. of the disputed tax till the disposal of appeals. But a copy of the order has not been filed with the petition. It is not proper to hazard any opinion in ignorance of the actual terms of the stay order.
(3.) THE second challenge is put forward in two ways. According to Sri Khare, interest is a tax and accordingly there should be a notice of demand for interest. According to Sri Raja Ram Agarwal, the assessment order of the Sales Tax Officer is merged in the assessment order of the appellate authority and accordingly there should be a fresh notice of demand after the appellate order asking for payment of the tax assessed by the appellate authority.;