Exemption claims for road and government-building related services must be examined before insisting on pre-deposit.

Where the appellant specifically invoked exemption provisions for services relating to road divider maintenance and maintenance of the garden forming part of Raj Bhavan, the appellate authority was required to examine those claims before insisting on pre-deposit. Because the exemption contentions went to the root of liability, directing pre-deposit without first considering their applicability was not proper. The pre-deposit order was set aside and the matter was remanded for decision on merits without insisting on pre-deposit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authority was required to consider the applicability of the exemption provisions relating to maintenance of road divider and maintenance of the garden forming part of Raj Bhavan before directing pre-deposit.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the nature of the services and whether they fell within the exemptions for services in relation to roads and government buildings. The record showed that the appellant had specifically invoked the exemption provisions, and those contentions went to the root of the liability itself. In such circumstances, directing pre-deposit without first examining the applicability of the exemption provisions was not .

Conclusion: The order directing pre-deposit was set aside and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for decision on merits without insisting on pre-deposit.

---