2014 (8) TMI 258

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...."When appeal filed by the assessee before the Value Added Tax Tribunal was against an order of the appellate commissioner dismissing the appeal for non fulfillment of the condition of pre-deposit, whether it was open for the tribunal to hear the issues on merits and allow or reject the assessee's appeal on the merits of the additions made by the Assessing Officer?" 3.Briefly stated facts are as under : 3.1. The appellant is a dealer registered under the VAT Act as well as the Central Sales Tax Act. For the year 2009-2010, the Assessing Officer passed an order of assessment on 18.2.2010 raising additional tax demand of Rs. 12.44 lakhs(rounded off) under the VAT Act and Rs. 2 lakhs(rounded off) under the CST Act with interest and penalties.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appeal to the Commissioner would have to be accompanied by depositing the tax unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, any part thereof is waived by the Commissioner. The issue before the tribunal thus was whether the Commissioner was justified in insisting that the appellant deposits 20% of the entire demand. The tribunal at its discretion could have either confirmed such an order, modified or even wholly set aside for appropriate reasons. In any case, tribunal could not have proceeded to hear the appeal as if it were a direct first appeal against the order of Assessing Officer totally bypassing the statutory first appellate authority. 5. In a judgement dated 30.1.2014 passed in Tax Appeal No.688/2013, we had made the following obse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ame to be dismissed. It was against this order that the appellant had preferred appeal before the Tribunal. The scope of the appeal before the Tribunal, therefore, had to be limited to the question of finding out whether the order passed by the Commissioner insisting on the appellant depositing certain amount by way of pre-deposit was valid or not and resultantly, his decision to reject such an appeal for noncompliance with such requirement was correct or not. 5. Unless and until the answers were given to such questions, the appellants first appeal before the appellate authority was simply not maintainable and could not have been entertained. If that be so, the Tribunal could not have entered into merits and in the appeal before itself and....