Vested appellate rights and certificate-limited appeals: amended tax deposit applied where pre-amendment commencement was not proved.

A certificate-restricted appeal cannot be expanded at hearing to raise grounds outside the scope of the certificate, especially where the record does not support the proposed factual basis. The Court also treated the amended requirement of depositing assessed tax as a condition precedent to admission of the appeal as operative, because the party failed to show that the lis had commenced and the appellate right had vested before the amendment. The earlier vested-right principle therefore did not apply. The additional grounds were rejected and the assessment-related challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appellant could be permitted, in a certificate-restricted appeal, to urge grounds not covered by the certificate; (ii) Whether the amendment making deposit of assessed tax a condition precedent to the admission of the appeal could be resisted on the footing that the right of appeal had already vested before the amendment.

Issue (i): Whether the appellant could be permitted, in a certificate-restricted appeal, to urge grounds not covered by the certificate.

Analysis: The appeal was confined by the certificate to questions arising under Article 132(1) of the Constitution. The attempted additional ground did not fall within that limit and was sought to be introduced only during the hearing. The record also did not furnish adequate material to support the proposed factual basis for that ground.

Conclusion: The request to urge additional grounds was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the amendment making deposit of assessed tax a condition precedent to the admission of the appeal could be resisted on the footing that the right of appeal had already vested before the amendment.

Analysis: The applicability of the rule depended on when the lis commenced and whether the right of appeal had crystallised before the amendment. As the petition did not disclose the necessary dates and the record did not establish that the lis had begun prior to the amendment, the earlier principle protecting vested appellate rights could not be applied.

Conclusion: The amended condition governing admission of the appeal could not be displaced, and the challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed in substance, and the assessment-related challenge was not sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory condition imposed on the admission of an appeal applies unless it is shown that the lis had commenced and the appellate right had vested before the amendment; where the necessary foundational facts are not established, the earlier vested-right principle does not operate.

---