VIVEK CHAUDHARY,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
(2.) The revisionist had filed an appeal, in which, the Additional Commissioner had passed an order staying 60% of the demand made against him and he was required to pay 40% of the demand. Against the said order, revisionist preferred a second appeal, in which, the Second Appellate Authority has stayed 75% of the demand and revisionist is required to pay 25% of the demand.
(3.) Both the First Appellate Authority as well as the Second Appellate Authority have given categorical findings that revisionist has no any financial hardship and before this Court also he has not filed any document to show that he is facing any financial hardship.;