Restoration of tax appeal proceedings should favor merits-based hearing over technical rejection when Form-F is sought on record.

Restoration of a long-pending tax appeal should be considered on the facts, with emphasis on deciding the matter on merits rather than rejecting it on technical grounds. The Tribunal was expected to assess whether the non-appearance and request to place Form-F on record justified restoration, and rejection solely because the litigation was pending and the tax demand remained unpaid was insufficient. The proper course was to restore the matter, subject to costs, so the appeal could be heard in accordance with law. The rejection of the restoration application was therefore unsustainable, and restoration of the earlier application in the second appeal was warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the restoration application and whether the second restoration application should have been allowed by restoring the earlier restoration application in the second appeal.

Analysis: The petition concerned restoration of proceedings in a long-pending tax appeal. The reason for non-appearance was to be assessed on the facts of the case, and the Tribunal was required to consider whether restoration could be permitted in the interest of adjudication on merits, particularly where the petitioners sought to place Form-F on record for the pending appeal. Rejection merely on the ground of pendency of the litigation and non-payment of tax demand was found to be an insufficient basis to deny restoration. The proper course was to restore the matter with costs so that the appeal could be heard on merits in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The rejection of the restoration application was unsustainable, and restoration of the earlier restoration application in the second appeal was warranted in favour of the petitioners, subject to costs.

---