2001 (1) TMI 422

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. Smt. Reena Arya, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. -  After careful examination of the records and hearing both sides, we find that this is a fit case to be disposed of finally at this stage. We, therefore, allow the present stay application unconditionally and proceed to dispose of the appeal itself finally. 2. The jurisdictional Additional C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioner (Appeals) proceeded to reject the appeal on the sole ground of non-compliance with Section 35F of the Act, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the appellants. This resulted in the impugned order. 3. We have heard learned Advocate, Shri Uday Joshi, for the appellants and learned SDR, Smt. Reena Arya, for the Revenue. The learned Counsel submits that the order of the Commissio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the stay order of the Commissioner (Appeals), that authority had no option other than dismissing the appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of the Act. Therefore, according to the learned SDR, there is nothing wrong in the impugned order. 4. We have carefully examined the rival submissions. We note that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had passed the order without....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... lower appellate authority to raise a reasoned finding on the question whether the party could make out a strong prima facie case or not for the purpose of waiver of pre-deposit The stay order was, therefore, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. Non-consideration of the modification application adds to the gravity of this mischief. The final order passed by the lower appellate....