Supreme Court corrects Tribunal's error on merger principle, restores appeal for consideration.

The Supreme Court set aside the erroneous order of the Tribunal dismissing the appellant's appeal based on an incorrect application of the principle of merger. The Court clarified that the principle of merger did not apply as the appeal challenged various aspects of the order. It was revealed that the appellant had made the necessary deposit before the appeal was struck off the register. The Court restored the appeal for consideration on its merits by the Tribunal, ultimately allowing the appeal with each party bearing their own costs.

---

---

Issues involved: Show cause notice leading to confirmation of demand, imposition of penalty, appeal before various authorities, application for restoration, principle of merger, erroneous application of principle of merger, deposit made by the appellant.

Summary:
The appellant received a show cause notice resulting in the confirmation of a demand amount along with the imposition of a penalty and interest. Appeals were made to different authorities, with the Tribunal directing a pre-deposit for entertaining the appeal. The High Court extended the time for deposit, but the appellant's appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal for non-compliance. An application for restoration was filed, but it was dismissed based on the erroneous application of the principle of merger.

The Tribunal erroneously held that the appellant's appeal could not be entertained as the order of the Commissioner got merged with the Tribunal's order dismissing the Revenue's appeal. However, it was clarified that the principle of merger did not apply in this case, as the appellant's appeal challenged not only the penalty but the entire order, including the inclusion of freight expenses in the assessable value.

It was later revealed that the appellant had indeed made the required deposit before the appeal was struck off the register, but this information was not brought to the Tribunal's attention. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and restored the appellant's appeal to be decided on merits by the Tribunal. The appeal was allowed, with each party bearing their own costs.

---