https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774340 Section 26(5)(a) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 was treated as requiring the Tribunal to determine a second appeal on merits, with power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment. A procedural rule could not override that statutory mandate, so dismissal of the appeal for absence of counsel or for non-prosecution was impermissible. The refusal to restore the second appeal was therefore unsustainable, and the matter had to be heard and decided on merits. en-us Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Jul 2025 08:36:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774340 Section 26(5)(a) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 was treated as requiring the Tribunal to determine a second appeal on merits, with power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment. A procedural rule could not override that statutory mandate, so dismissal of the appeal for absence of counsel or for non-prosecution was impermissible. The refusal to restore the second appeal was therefore unsustainable, and the matter had to be heard and decided on merits. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774340