JUDGMENT P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON :- The petitioner has approached this court challenging the course and procedure followed by the appellate authority in entertaining the appeal preferred by the petitioner against exhibit P1 assessment conducted by the Fast Track Team under section 17(D), whereby, notwithstanding the merits projected, the petitioner has been compelled to satisfy the entire tax liability so as to avail of the statutory remedy conferred by way of appeal. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, by virtue of the said stipulation, the remedy by way of appeal conferred under the statute has been virtually rendered meaningless and hence that the stipulation under section 17D(5) to satisfy the tax liability for availing of the appellate remedy is rather oppressive in nature. It is in the said circumstance, the petitioner has chosen to challenge the virus of statutory prescription as well. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits that no exception can be made in view of the law already declared by the Division Bench of this court in Viani Papers v. Fast Track Team in [2008] 2 KLT 511 whereby the validity of the provision has been upheld. It is also relevant to note that the apex court has recently considered the issue as to the liability to pay the tax at the time of filing the appeal in Ravi Gupta v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Delhi reported in [2009] 22 VST 529 (SC) which bars the way of the petitioner. In the said circumstance, the legal position stands already answered against the petitioner and as such, no interference is called for. The writ petition fails and it is dismissed accordingly.