Monetary limit policy does not bar restoration where the dispute concerns recurring service classification issues.

An appeal dismissed under the litigation policy's monetary limit can be restored where the dispute falls within the recognised exception for classification issues of a legal or recurring nature. The text states that the earlier dismissal was only a collective summary disposal based on the monetary threshold, while the underlying controversy concerned classification of the respondent's activities as taxable service. Because such classification disputes are continuing in nature, they are not governed by the monetary bar. The restoration was therefore treated as correction of an obvious mistake apparent from the record, not a review of the prior order, and the appeal was restored for decision on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal dismissed under the monetary limit in the litigation policy could be restored on the ground that the dispute involved classification of service and was of recurring nature, constituting an exception to the policy.

Analysis: The order restoring the appeal was justified because the earlier dismissal was only a collective summary disposal based on the monetary limit. On the material placed, the dispute concerned classification of the respondent's activities as taxable service, and such classification issue was continuing in nature. Matters falling within the exception for classification issues of legal or recurring nature are not governed by the monetary bar. The earlier summary dismissal, therefore, was treated as an obvious mistake apparent from the record and not a review of the prior order.

Conclusion: The restoration application was rightly allowed, and the appeal was restored for decision on merits.

---