Pre-deposit compliance and stay application issues led to remand, allowing a fresh petition before the appellate authority.

An appeal rejected for non-filing of a waiver or stay application and for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement was set aside, as the omission was treated as inadvertent and the respondent did not oppose remand. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) with liberty to file a fresh stay petition, enabling consideration of the request for waiver before the first appellate authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal, rejected for want of an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit and for non-payment of the adjudged dues, should be set aside and the matter remanded to enable filing of a fresh stay petition before the Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis: The appellate forum had rejected the appeal solely on the ground that no stay petition or waiver application had been filed and the pre-deposit requirement had not been complied with. The omission was treated as inadvertent, and the respondent did not oppose the request for remand. In these circumstances, the impugned order was found fit to be set aside so that the appellant could pursue the stay application before the first appellate authority.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals), with liberty to the appellant to file a stay petition.

---