Court sets aside deposit order, instructs new order after hearing opportunity, emphasizes considering all contentions.

The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the order requiring the petitioner to deposit 50% of the confirmed demand during the appeal. The Court instructed the Commissioner (Appeals) to issue a new order after granting a hearing opportunity to the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of considering all parties' contentions. The new order was to be issued within one month of receiving the certified copy of the judgment.

---

---

Issues:
1. Lack of opportunity of hearing and knowledge of hearing date.
2. Requirement of pre-deposit for granting appeal.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged an order directing them to deposit 50% of the confirmed demand during the pendency of the appeal, as the Commissioner (Appeals) found no mention of potential loss in the stay application. The petitioner argued lack of hearing opportunity and unawareness of the hearing date. The respondents contended that the stay petition did not establish grounds for the demand stay. The petitioner highlighted the absence of a provision for pre-deposit in the Finance Act, 1994.

2. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's concerns regarding the lack of hearing opportunity and unawareness of the hearing date. Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the order and instructing the Commissioner (Appeals) to issue a new order after granting a hearing opportunity to the petitioner. The Court emphasized considering all parties' contentions and instructed the Commissioner to issue a new order within one month of receiving the certified copy of the judgment.

---