9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 4, for three years, i.e., 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02 before the second respondent, first appellate authority. Those appeals were dismissed on the ground that the petitioner did not make the required pre-deposit of 50 per cent of the amount, assessed by the fourth respondent. According to the petitioner, since he had closed down the business in the year 2002, he was not in a financial po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of such tax (including interest payable) or penalty or both. However, it is seen that the first appellate authority, without passing separate orders as to whether the petitioner is entitled for such exemption, dismissed the appeal on the ground that there was no pre-deposit. The petitioner pursued the matter before the Tribunal. It appears, before the Tribunal, the petitioner took up a conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... namely, the second respondent with a direction to pass orders on the applications, filed by the petitioner, in terms of proviso to sub-section (5) of section 30 of the Act for exemption from pre-deposit. Orders, as above, shall be passed within a month from today. The petitioner will appear before the first appellate authority on July 19, 2010, on which date the first appellate authority shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
