https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782313 HC held that the appellate authority erred in dismissing the petitioner's appeal for non-compliance with the mandatory 10% pre-deposit requirement. It was found that the amount already deposited by the petitioner under protest should have been treated as satisfying the statutory pre-deposit condition for entertaining the appeal. Consequently, the impugned order dated 28.02.2024 was set aside. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority (1st respondent) for fresh consideration of the appeal on merits, in accordance with law. The petition was allowed by way of remand. en-us Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782313 HC held that the appellate authority erred in dismissing the petitioner's appeal for non-compliance with the mandatory 10% pre-deposit requirement. It was found that the amount already deposited by the petitioner under protest should have been treated as satisfying the statutory pre-deposit condition for entertaining the appeal. Consequently, the impugned order dated 28.02.2024 was set aside. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority (1st respondent) for fresh consideration of the appeal on merits, in accordance with law. The petition was allowed by way of remand. Case-Laws GST Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782313