https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190158 The Tribunal held that it lacked jurisdiction to restore appeals after the appellant failed to comply with the High Court's extended deadline for pre-deposit. The High Court's order was treated as bringing the interim pre-deposit direction within the supervisory appellate process, so the Tribunal could not disregard the extended time once fixed. On that basis, the doctrine of merger applied and the Tribunal became functus officio after expiry of the compliance period without payment. The competing view that delayed compliance could be accepted in the interest of justice and the appeals restored was rejected, and the restoration applications failed. en-us Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Feb 2017 09:40:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190158 The Tribunal held that it lacked jurisdiction to restore appeals after the appellant failed to comply with the High Court's extended deadline for pre-deposit. The High Court's order was treated as bringing the interim pre-deposit direction within the supervisory appellate process, so the Tribunal could not disregard the extended time once fixed. On that basis, the doctrine of merger applied and the Tribunal became functus officio after expiry of the compliance period without payment. The competing view that delayed compliance could be accepted in the interest of justice and the appeals restored was rejected, and the restoration applications failed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190158