Appeal on merits cannot be shut out when required deposit is ultimately made and the dispute is fit for substantive adjudication.

Where the required deposit for entertaining an appeal was ultimately made, the appeal should not be defeated on a technical objection that the payment was made after the extended date. The Court held that, since the assessee had sought further time before depositing the amount and the dispute was capable of adjudication on merits, the appellate forum ought to hear the matter substantively. The rejection of the request for extension of time was set aside, and the appeal was directed to proceed on merits in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's appeal should be heard on merits after deposit of the amount directed by the appellate authority, and whether the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the application for extension of time.

Analysis: The amount directed for deposit was ultimately paid by the assessee, though beyond the extended date, and the assessee had sought further extension before making the deposit. In these circumstances, the Court held that the appeal ought not to be shut out on a technical ground and should be examined on merits.

Conclusion: The rejection of the application for extension of time was set aside and the appellate authority was directed to hear the appeal on merits in accordance with law, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The assessee was granted relief so that its statutory appeal could proceed to merits after the required deposit had been made.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the amount required for entertaining an appeal has been deposited and the dispute can be adjudicated on merits, the appeal should not be defeated solely on a technical objection as to the timing of deposit.

---