TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the Tribunal - The scope of the appeal before the Tribunal had to be limited to the question of finding out whether the order passed by the Commissioner insisting on the appellant depositing certain amount by way of pre deposit was valid or not and resultantly, his decision to reject such an appeal for noncompliance with such requirement was correct or no - there was no prayer for setting aside the appellate order of imposing condition and subsequently, dismissing his appeal when he failed to fulfill such condition - the Tribunal could have either permitted the appellant to suitably amend the prayer or if the appellant was not willing to do so, dismiss his appeal as not maintainable - the Tribunal could not have bypassed the FAA and sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of the appeal on merits and allowed the claim of the assessee in part. 3. Learned AGP Shri Jaimin Gandhi for the Department submitted that only issue before the Tribunal was regarding correctness of the condition of pre-deposit imposed by the Appellate Authority. The Tribunal could not have entertained the appeal on merits bypassing the first Appellate Authority. Issue Notice for final disposal returnable on 15th December 2014. Direct service is permitted. In the case of Anilkumar Vs. State of Gujarat in Tax Appeal No. 688 of 2013, a Division Bench of this Court had passed the following order: 3. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed serious error in examining the appellant s grievances on the merits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l before the Tribunal, therefore, had to be limited to the question of finding out whether the order passed by the Commissioner insisting on the appellant depositing certain amount by way of predeposit was valid or not and resultantly, his decision to reject such an appeal for noncompliance with such requirement was correct or not. 5. Unless and until the answers were given to such questions, the appellant s first appeal before the appellate authority was simply not maintainable and could not have been entertained. If that be so, the Tribunal could not have entered into merits and in the appeal before itself and given a judgment on the validity of the order of assessment. In the process, the Tribunal jettisoned the first appeal before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
