Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for Petitioner submitted that Rajasthan Tax Board vide its order dated 8th July, 2011 has dismissed the application for stay filed by Petitioner to grant stay during pendency of appeal on the ground that Petitioner has not deposited pre -deposit amount before or at the time of filing the appeal, whereas Petitioner had deposited more than 10% of the disputed amount. During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for Petitioner referred certain receipts having deposited the amount S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10243/2011 of tax etc. He further submitted that Rajasthan Tax Board has fixed the appeal itself for final hearing on 29th August, 2011, therefore, either the interim stay order be passed till the disposal of the appeal before Rajasthan Tax Board or Rajasthan Tax Board be directed to decide the appeal finally on 29th August, 2011. I have considered the submissions of learned Counsel for parties.
(3.) FROM the documents annexed with the writ petition and from the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties, it appears that initially, there was some confusion in calculation of disputed amount, but ultimately it was resolved and pre -deposit amount was deposited, but the receipts thereof were not placed on record, therefore, Rajasthan Tax Board has observed that evidence, with regard to deposit of pre -deposit amount, has not been placed on record.;