TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 1110
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....20 insofar as the Tribunal has required it to deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount as a condition for consideration of its appeal on merits. The order of Tribunal is assailed primarily on the ground that prima facie case of assessee has neither been examined nor there is any consideration of the financial health of the company and, therefore, the order impugned cannot be sustained. It is also urged that on account of COVID-19 Pandemic there is already a pressure upon the company and even 10% of the amount would unnecessarily burden the financial health of the company. In support of such contention, learned counsel for the revisionist has relied upon an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in I.T.C. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner (Appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er connotation as it takes within its ambit the case where the assessee is asked to deposit the amount even if he is likely to exonerate from the total liability on disposal of his appeal. Dispensation of deposit should also be allowed where two view are possible. While considering the application for interim relief, the Court must examine all pros and cons involved in the case and further examine that in case recovery is not stayed, the right of appeal conferred by the legislature and refusal to exercise the discretionary power by the authority to stay/waive the pre-deposit condition, would be reduced to nugatory/illusory. Undoubtedly, the interest of the Revenue cannot be jeopardized but that does not mean that in order to protect the int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the case. The Appellate Authority should have addressed its mind to the prima facie merits of the appellants' case and upon being satisfied of the same determined the quantum of deposit taking into consideration the financial hardship and other such relevant factors. 3. We accordingly set aside the decision of the High Court as well as the impugned order dated 14-8-2002 and remand the matter back to the appellate authority for re-determining the issue under Section 35F of the Act after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties. 4. The appeal is allowed without any order as to costs". Reliance is also placed upon a decision of this Court in Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, Varanasi Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax and others, 2000 ....