Vested right of appeal governs pre-deposit requirements, and a later amendment will not apply retrospectively without clear intent.

An amendment increasing the pre-deposit requirement for sales tax appeals did not apply retrospectively to an appeal arising from assessment proceedings initiated before the amendment. The court treated the right of appeal as a vested substantive right governed by the law in force when the proceeding began, unless the later amendment clearly shows a contrary intention by express words or necessary implication. Because the appellant had complied with the earlier one-third deposit requirement within time, rejection of the appeal for non-deposit under the amended 75 per cent rule was not justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amended pre-deposit requirement under section 38(3-A) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act applied to an appeal arising from an assessment proceeding initiated before the amendment, or whether the appeal was governed by the earlier provision requiring deposit of only one-third of the balance demand.

Analysis: The assessment related to the calendar year 1976 and the assessment proceedings were initiated before 1 October 1978, when the amendment introducing section 38(3-A) came into force. Under the earlier section 38(3), the appellant was required to deposit only one-third of the balance demand along with the memo of appeal, and that amount had been deposited within time. The amended provision requiring deposit of 75 per cent was not expressed to operate retrospectively. Since the right of appeal is a vested substantive right, it is governed by the law in force when the proceeding was initiated unless the later amendment clearly takes it away by express words or necessary implication.

Conclusion: The appeal was governed by the unamended provision and the summary rejection for non-deposit under the amended provision was not justified.

Final Conclusion: The application succeeded and the Tribunal was required to state the case on the question of law framed for the Court's opinion.

Ratio Decidendi: A vested right of appeal is governed by the law in force when the proceeding is initiated, and a subsequent amendment enhancing pre-deposit requirements does not apply retrospectively unless such intention is clearly expressed or necessarily implied.

---