Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) directing pre-deposit and the consequential dismissal of the appeal were vitiated for non-observance of natural justice, and whether the matter was required to be remanded for fresh consideration.
Analysis: The stay order was passed without affording personal hearing and without showing due consideration of the relevant facts and circumstances of the case while exercising discretion on waiver of pre-deposit. The subsequent rejection of the appeal was based solely on non-compliance with that pre-deposit direction. Since the foundation order was made in breach of natural justice, the consequential final order could not stand. A speaking order on the stay application and a proper opportunity of hearing were necessary before the appeal could be disposed of on merits.
Conclusion: The stay order and the consequential dismissal order were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration of the stay application and thereafter disposal of the appeal after granting a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing.
Ratio Decidendi: An order on stay and pre-deposit must be passed after considering the relevant facts and circumstances and after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing; failure to do so vitiates the consequential dismissal of the appeal.