Conditional bond requirement upheld for disputed legal benefit fund contribution before appeal proceeds on merits.

Enhanced legal benefit fund contribution was disputed on the ground that the Tribunal required payment of an additional 0.5%. The HC did not decide the rival merits, but followed a similar course to protect both parties by allowing the appeal to proceed on condition that the petitioner execute a simple bond without sureties for the disputed excess amount. The original petition was disposed of with conditional relief, and the appeal was directed to be considered and decided on merits after compliance with the bond requirement.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal should be directed to be considered on merits on the petitioner executing a simple bond without sureties in respect of the enhanced legal benefit fund contribution.

Analysis: The assessment related to the year 2013-14 and the dispute arose from the enhancement of the legal benefit fund contribution and the Tribunal's insistence on remittance of the additional 0.5%. The Court declined to express any view on the merits of the rival contentions and, taking note of the course adopted in a similar matter, considered it appropriate to protect both sides by permitting the appeal to proceed subject to execution of a simple bond without sureties for the disputed excess amount.

Outcome: The Original Petition was disposed of by granting conditional relief and directing the appeal to be considered and decided on merits after compliance with the bond requirement.

---