1. Procedural Background (Para 3):

• The petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority challenging the order dated 25 April 2022.
• While filing the appeal online, the mandatory pre-deposit column was inadvertently left blank.

2. Compliance with Pre-deposit Requirement (Para 4):

• Upon realizing the error, the petitioner made the 10% mandatory pre-deposit through the electronic cash ledger.
• Despite this compliance, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal, citing the earlier error.

3. Judicial Concern on Rigid Stand (Para 5):

• The High Court noted that the appellate authority's dismissal of the appeal after correcting the error was excessively rigid and disproportionate.

4. Setting Aside the Impugned Order (Para 6):

• The Court set aside the impugned order dated 13 April 2023 and restored the appeal before the appellate authority.
• The appellate authority was directed to hear and dispose of the appeal on merits as the pre-deposit requirement was fulfilled.

5. Directions and Final Disposition (Para 7 & 8):

• Rule made absolute with no cost order.
• All parties were directed to act based on the authenticated copy of the judgment.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Provisions related to the mandatory pre-deposit requirement for filing appeals under taxation laws (not specifically mentioned but likely from GST Acts or similar statutes).

Ratio Decidendi:

• The Court emphasized that procedural errors, when promptly corrected, should not result in the dismissal of substantive appeals.
• The principle of proportionality was applied to ensure that procedural lapses do not override the right to a fair hearing.

Subjects:

• Procedural Justice
• Pre-deposit Requirement
• Tax Appeals
• Inadvertent Errors
• Appellate Authority Decisions