Judgment :- 1. Aggrieved against the conditions imposed by the appellate authority, while granting interim orders, the petitioner firm is before this Court. 2. Since the issue in question are one and the same, these Writ Petitions are taken up together and decided by way of a common order. 3. Mr. A.Muthukaruupan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. 4. By consent, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal. 5. At the time of preferring an appeal, the petitioner firm has paid 25% of the disputed tax in each of the Writ Petitions. For the balance amount, the appellate authority directed the petitioner firm to file a Security Bond or Bank Guarantee. However, the petitioner firm is not in a position to provide the same. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the amount demanded by the respondents is a disputed question, which has to be decided by the authority concerned. Therefore, he seeks modification of the order of the appellate authority. 6. The learned Additional Government Pleader would only contend that even as per the decision of the Supreme Court unless safe guard in respect of payment in question is made, the revenue of the Government will be at stake. Therefore, the order of the appellate authority holds good. 7. Heard both sides. 8. The short point involved in these Writ Petitions are the conditions imposed by the appellate authority in respect of stay granted in favour of the petitioner firm. As stated earlier, the petitioner firm has already paid 25% of the amount in question at the time of preferring the appeal and also paid the additional amount as directed to be paid in the impugned stay order. Now the question is regarding security bond or bank guarantee for the balance of tax and penalty amount. In a similar occasion, I had an occasion to deal with the matter in W.P.(MD).No.20273 of 2013 dated 16.12.2013.In paragraph No.5, I have observed as follows:- “5. In an unreported judgment of the Division Bench of this Court made in W.A.(MD).No.194 of 2005, dated 13.07.2006, this Court has stated as follows:- “2. When the appellant preferred a statutory appeal before the first respondent, as a condition precedent for filing an appeal, the appellant deposited 25% of the tax assessed. In an unreported judgment of the Division Bench of this Court made in W.A.(MD).No.194 of 2005, dated 13.07.2006, this Court has stated as follows:- “2. When the appellant preferred a statutory appeal before the first respondent, as a condition precedent for filing an appeal, the appellant deposited 25% of the tax assessed. It is stated that as per the interim orders of the first respondent, the appellant has also paid another 20% of the assessed tax which is under challenge before the first respondent. 3. In such circumstances, we feel that the interim order of stay granted by the first respondent can be directed to be continued subject to the appellant furnishing a personal bond for the remaining tax amount as well as penalty. 4. Subject to such modification, the Writ Appeal stands disposed of. The order of the learned Single Judge is also modified to the above extent. Such personal bond shall be furnished by the appellant within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.” 9. In view of the earlier order and also in view of the fact that the petitioner firm has paid the amount towards his liability including the additional amount directed to be paid in the impugned stay order, this court, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, modifies the conditions imposed by the appellate authority only insofar as to the grant of Bank Guarantee:- (i) In lieu of Bank Guarantee, as directed by the appellate authority, the petitioner firm shall pay another 10% of the disputed tax demanded in the notice in each of the Writ Petitions to the respondents, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) For the balance tax amount as well as for the entire penalty amount, the petitioner firm shall execute a personal bond with the appellate authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that if the petitioner firm fails to adhere any one of the conditions imposed by this Court through this order, this modification granted by this Court shall stand cancelled without any reference to this Court and the order of the appellate authority will get automatically restored. 10. It is made clear that if the petitioner firm fails to adhere any one of the conditions imposed by this Court through this order, this modification granted by this Court shall stand cancelled without any reference to this Court and the order of the appellate authority will get automatically restored. 10. These Writ Petitions stand allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs.