TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Signatory to sign Appeal documents under Companies Act, 1956; (ii) that the Authorized Signatory has not put her name under her signature; (iii) that there was a delay in filing of the Appeal of 27 days; (iv) that the Petitioner has made payment of pre-deposit vide DRC-03 which is not a correct mode of payment of pre-deposit. 2 The very first ground on the basis on which the appeal has been dismissed is that the appeal has not been signed by authorised signatory and appellant has not submitted Board Resolution under the Companies Act, 1956, appointing the said person as authorised signatory to sign the appeals, documents or any other proof of his being authorised signatory of appellant. Admittedly, petitioner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mr. Mishra stated that the impugned order could be quashed and set aside and the matter remanded for denovo consideration. Ordered accordingly. 3. Appellate Authority who will hear this appeal shall give personal hearing to Appellant, notice whereof shall be communicated atleast 5 working days in advance. The order to be passed shall be a reasoned order dealing with all submissions of Appellant. If the Appellate Authority is going to rely on any order or judgment of any Court or Tribunal or any other forum, a list thereof shall be made available along with the notice for personal hearing. If the order or a judgment is unreported then a copy thereof shall also be made available along with the notice. This is to enable Appellant to d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it would have been clarified. We agree with Mr. Sridharan. In a similar matter in Writ Petition (L) No. 23724 of 2024, this Court had, by an order dated 27th August 2024 set aside the order passed by the Appellate Authority and remanded it for de novo consideration. The said order reads as under:- "1. Petitioner is impugning an order-in-original dated 6th May 2024 passed by Respondent No. 2. The appeal has been dismissed on the ground that the appeal is filed beyond the limitation provided and there was no application for condonation of delay and the amount of pre-deposit has also not been made. 2. With the assistance of the counsels, we have gone through the petition and the impugned order. In the online portal form filed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... any order or judgment of any Court or Tribunal or any other forum, a list thereof shall be made available alongwith the notice for personal hearing. If the order or a judgment is unreported then a copy thereof shall also be made available alongwith the notice. This will enable Petitioner to deal with / distinguish the judgment or order. 6. If after the personal hearing, Petitioner wishes to submit written submissions recording what transpired or what was submitted during the personal hearing, Petitioner may do so within 3 working days of the personal hearing. 7. The appeal shall be disposed by 30th November 2024. 8. All rights and contentions are kept open to the parties. 9. We clarify that we have not m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....circular came into force. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore vs. M/s. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd. 2006 (204) ELT 517 (SC), the CESTAT held that the circular would apply only prospectively. 5. In fact, this court in Oasis Realty vs. Union of India (2023) 3 Centax 86 (Bom) decided on 16th September 2022 has held that assessee may utilize the amount available in the Electronic Credit Ledger to pay 10% of the amount of tax in dispute under Section 107 (6) of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 6. We should also note that the High Court of Karnataka in Union of India vs. Vikrant Tyres Ltd. 1999 taxmann.com 362 (Karnataka) while dealing with the p....