2000 (7) TMI 873

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Carefully examined the records. Heard both sides. Having been convinced of the existence of a strong prima facie case in favour of the applicants, I allow the stay application unconditionally and, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, proceed to dispose of the appeal itself finally. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner had ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) then directed the appellants to make pre-deposit of an amount of Rs. 2 lakhs within 15 days, failing which, it was warned, the appeal itself would be dismissed for default under Section 35F without further reference in the matter. The appellants on 11-2-2000 submitted a representation to Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) praying for reconsideration of the above order and for ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by Commissioner (Appeals). Ld. JDR, Dr. Ravinder Babu has given his version of the facts and circumstances of the case in defence of the impugned order. He has rather insisted on rejecting the present stay application and directing the party to make pre-deposit of the entire amount in dispute. 3. I have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of the facts and circumstances....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... party while issuing the direction for deposit of Rs. 2 lakhs, which he was duty bound to do under Section 35F of the Act. In view of this position, the stay order suffers from non-application of mind. The order does not reveal a reasonable exercise of discretion by the quasi judicial authority. That authority ought to have, at least, considered the subsequent representation made by the appellants....