Predeposit condition upheld where remand was accepted and no clear error justified interference with dismissal for non-compliance.

A court will not interfere with a tribunal's predeposit condition where the assessee had already accepted a remand order linked to repayment of a prima facie wrongful refund. The competent authority's quantification, after giving credit for sums already paid, was treated as sufficient, and minor arithmetical issues were not enough to reopen the exercise. Because the assessee had already obtained the benefit of fresh assessment proceedings despite large tax demands, insisting on deposit for further hearing was justified. The challenge therefore failed, and no relief was granted against the dismissal for non-compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Court should interfere with the Tribunal's order requiring deposit of a substantial amount as a condition for hearing the appeal and declining to interfere when the petitioner failed to comply.

Analysis: The petitioner had earlier accepted the Tribunal's order remanding the assessment proceedings on the condition that the refund, prima facie obtained on the basis of fake invoices, would be repaid. The competent authority thereafter quantified the refundable amount after giving credit for amounts already paid and deposited. The Court found that some arithmetical adjustment, if any, would not justify reopening the entire exercise, particularly when the petitioner had already obtained the benefit of fresh assessments in proceedings involving tax demands of several hundred crores. In those circumstances, insisting on predeposit for further hearing was held to be justified and no ground for interference was made out.

Conclusion: The challenge to the Tribunal's order failed and the petitioner was not entitled to interference against the predeposit condition or the resulting dismissal of the appeal.

Final Conclusion: The Court upheld the Tribunal's approach and declined to disturb the conditional restoration and predeposit requirements, leaving the petitioner without relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessee has already accepted a remand order conditioned on repayment of a prima facie wrongful refund, the Court will not interfere with a further predeposit requirement or upset the dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance unless a clear error or injustice is shown.

---