Recorded concession and no timely objection can defeat appellate interference, leaving review before the tribunal as the proper remedy.

Appellate interference may be declined where a tribunal's order rests on a recorded concession by the Departmental Representative and the party challenging it did not timely object, even if the exemption notification was later corrected on rectification. The discussion notes that the appellant sought to contest satisfaction of the notification conditions after the fact, but the Court treated the recorded concession and the absence of an earlier objection as decisive against interference. Any further challenge was left to be pursued before the Tribunal if permissible in law.

---

---

Issues: Whether interference was warranted in appeal where the Tribunal had allowed the matter on the basis of the Departmental Representative's concession and the exemption notification had been corrected by rectification.

Analysis: The Tribunal's order proceeded on the Departmental Representative's agreement that the appeal had to be allowed in view of the earlier tribunal decision. The notification number in that order was later corrected on rectification. Although the appellant later sought to contend that the conditions of the exemption notification were not satisfied, the Court found that the Tribunal had acted on the concession then recorded and that the appellant had not taken timely exception even when rectification was sought. In these circumstances, the Court declined to interfere in appeal, leaving it open to the appellant to seek review or other permissible relief before the Tribunal.

Conclusion: The appeal was not interfered with and was dismissed, with liberty to pursue appropriate proceedings before the Tribunal if permissible in law.

Final Conclusion: The dismissal left the Tribunal's order undisturbed, subject only to the appellant's liberty to seek review or other lawful relief before the Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: Appellate interference may be declined where the impugned order was made on a recorded concession and the party seeking reversal did not timely object, leaving any further remedy to be pursued before the original forum if law permits.

---