Amended pre-deposit regime and agreed deposit terms led the Court to decline interference with the Tribunal's order.

The challenge concerned a Tribunal direction requiring deposit of 50% of the pre-deposited amount under the amended pre-deposit regime. The appellant relied on the amended statutory position and a departmental circular suggesting only 10% was required, but those materials had not been placed before the Tribunal and the appellant had agreed to the 50% deposit. In these circumstances, no interference was made with the Tribunal's order, and the appellant was left at liberty to seek review or modification before the Tribunal after bringing the relevant facts to its notice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's direction requiring deposit of 50% of the pre-deposited amount warranted interference in view of the amended pre-deposit regime.

Analysis: The challenge was founded on the plea that the amended statutory position and departmental circular required only 10% deposit. The record, however, showed that these aspects had not been placed before the Tribunal and that the appellant had agreed to deposit 50% of the pre-deposited amount. In those circumstances, the Court declined to interfere at that stage and left it open to the appellant to seek review or modification before the Tribunal after bringing the relevant facts to its notice.

Outcome: No interference was granted with the Tribunal's order; liberty was reserved to pursue review or modification before the Tribunal.

---