Pre-deposit compliance in appeals restored hearing on merits, with further deposit required within a fixed time.

Appellate orders refusing to entertain first appeals for non-compliance with the pre-deposit condition were set aside because the appeals had been declined solely on that ground. The HC noted the amount already recovered and the assessee's willingness to make an additional deposit within a fixed time, and exercised writ jurisdiction to ensure a hearing on merits while preserving compliance with the deposit requirement. The appeals were restored subject to deposit of the additional amount within two weeks, after which they were to be heard on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate orders refusing to entertain the first appeals for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement should be quashed and the appeals restored on further deposit.

Analysis: The appeals had been declined solely because the prescribed pre-deposit had not been made. The Court took note of the amount already recovered by the department and the assessee's willingness to make an additional deposit within a fixed time. In the interests of justice, the Court exercised writ jurisdiction to secure a hearing of the appeals on merits while ensuring compliance with the pre-deposit requirement.

Conclusion: The appellate orders were set aside and the appeals were restored, subject to deposit of the additional amount within two weeks, after which the appeals were to be heard on merits.

---