9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1627X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were not directly at issue before the Tribunal - considering the fact that the assessment proceedings were framed ex-parte and question is of pre-deposit at first appellate stage, we direct the appellant to deposit sum of ₹ 5 lacs with the department by way of pre-deposit latest by 15.1.2016, upon which, the appeals would be entertained by the Commissioner on merits being uninfluenced by observations of the Tribunal in the impugned judgement - order of Tribunal reversed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee. - TAX APPEAL NO. 761 to 763 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 10-12-2015 - Akil Kureshi and Mohinder Pal, JJ. Tushar P Hemani and Ms. Vaibhavi K Parikh for the appellant Ms. Vacha Desai, Additional Government Pleader, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with regard to pre-deposit are just and proper and no interference is called for in the said decision. We have made the above observations on the merits of the matter only with a view to arrive at the conclusion that the order regarding pre-deposit passed by the learned First Appellate Authority is just and proper and if the amount of pre-deposit is paid by the appellant, the matter can still be decided on merits without being influenced by any of the observations made herein above. 11. There is one more reason for not interfering in the orders passed by the learned First Appellate Authority. It is that the Assessing Officer while passing the provisional assessments, has not levied any penalty either under Section 34(7) and/or Section 34 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Learned counsel for the appellants pointed out that the assessment orders were passed by the Assessing Officer in absence of representative of appellant since there were some internal disputes between them. Be that as it may, assessment was made ex-parte. The Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal because appellant was unable to deposit the entire amount of tax with interest by way of pre-deposit. Before the Tribunal in further appeal, the assessee tried to demonstrate prima facie genuineness of the transaction under which the appellant had purchased the goods from various dealers. The Tribunal however, after perusing such documents opined that it would be giving a second innings to the appellant. As noted, the Tribunal opined tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
