Pre-deposit requirement controls appellate review; merits cannot be decided before the threshold issue is addressed.

Where the first appellate authority dismissed the appeal solely for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement and recorded no finding on merits, the Tribunal was required to confine itself to the threshold question of pre-deposit and the propriety of that dismissal. It could not bypass the statutory appellate sequence and decide the appeal on merits at that stage. The pre-deposit requirement regulates access to the appellate process, and the matter was remanded for decision in accordance with law after addressing that issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in deciding the appeal on merits when the first appellate authority had dismissed it only for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement, and whether the matter should be remanded.

Analysis: The dismissal by the first appellate authority was only on the ground that the required pre-deposit had not been made, and no finding on merits had been recorded. In such a situation, the Tribunal ought to have confined itself to the question of pre-deposit and the propriety of the order passed at the threshold, rather than bypassing the statutory appellate stage and pronouncing on merits. The requirement of pre-deposit is intended to regulate the appeal process, and the merits should ordinarily be examined by the appellate hierarchy in the proper sequence.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was not justified in deciding the matter on merits at that stage, and the matter was remanded for decision in accordance with law after addressing the pre-deposit issue.

---