Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal requiring deposit of 50 per cent of the additional demand as a for hearing the appeal, and dismissing the appeal for non-compliance without recording reasons, was sustainable under the proviso to section 39(5) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973.
Analysis: The proviso to section 39(5) contemplates exercise of discretion on relevant factors, including the appellant's ability to pay, and requires the authority to examine the record and decide the request for dispensation from pre-deposit on merits. When such discretion is exercised, reasons must be recorded and communicated, because a non-speaking or mechanical rejection prevents meaningful scrutiny and offends the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal had earlier permitted the appeal to be heard without insisting on deposit, but in the impugned order it merely imposed a 50 per cent deposit condition and later dismissed the appeal for non-compliance without dealing with the petitioner's plea of inability to pay.
Conclusion: The impugned orders were unsustainable and liable to be quashed for want of reasons and for breach of natural justice.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute empowers the appellate authority to waive or relax pre-deposit, the authority must pass a speaking order showing consideration of the relevant factors; a mechanical refusal without reasons is vitiated by breach of natural justice.