#Appellate Tribunal

The Bombay High Court ruled that the RERA Appellate Tribunal cannot adjudicate merits when the Regulatory Authority dismissed a complaint on maintainability grounds without a merits hearing. Doing so would deprive parties of their statutory right to first-instance adjudication and a subsequent appeal. The Tribunal must remand the matter to the Authority for fresh merits determination.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed a writ court’s direction to the Debt Recovery Tribunal to expedite SARFAESI proceedings, ruling that such a directive oversteps jurisdiction when borrowers retain the statutory remedy under Section 17(6) of the SARFAESI Act. The decision reinforces that writ jurisdiction cannot be used to fast-track recovery actions, preserving the borrower’s right to challenge dues before the DRT or appellate tribunal.

Allahabad HC reaffirms that rectification under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act is confined to mistakes evident on the record alone. The court held that issues like delay condonation or precedent application-requiring debate or interpretation-cannot be reviewed as apparent errors, impacting assessees seeking relief from appellate orders.

ITAT Kolkata reinforces that assessees must deposit at least 20% of the disputed tax demand to secure a stay under Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act, unless they can prove undue financial hardship. The ruling clarifies procedural compliance requirements for taxpayers seeking interim relief during appeals, impacting all direct tax litigation involving stay applications.

An appellate order under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, is void if passed by a single District Magistrate without the two mandatory non-official members mandated by Haryana’s 2020 notification. This ruling reinforces that quasi-judicial tribunals must strictly adhere to statutorily prescribed composition - affecting senior citizens’ appeals, district magistrates, and administrative compliance across Haryana and Punjab.

Taxpayers facing GST recovery orders can now secure a stay on collection by filing a pre-deposit and undertaking under CBIC Circular 224/2024, even when the Appellate Tribunal remains unconstituted, provided compliance occurs within 15 days. This relief bridges a critical procedural gap for taxpayers awaiting appellate review, offering immediate financial protection without requiring tribunal formation.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that Maintenance Tribunals must be constituted with the mandatory two Non-Official Members under Sections 7 and 15 of the Act. Orders passed by an incomplete bench are void ab initio and must be reheard, ensuring strict procedural compliance to protect senior citizens' rights.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that children and relatives can file appeals against maintenance orders under the 2007 Act, and appellate tribunals are obligated to register such appeals if filed within two weeks. This clarifies a critical procedural safeguard for dependents facing financial liability, reinforcing natural justice in senior citizen maintenance proceedings.

MP High Court reinforces that limitation rules must serve justice, not technicality, by condoning a 25-day delay in filing an appeal under the Food Safety and Standards Act. The ruling emphasizes that inadvertent delays with sufficient cause warrant condonation, protecting appellants from procedural rigidity.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that quasi-judicial powers under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, cannot be sub-delegated by the District Magistrate to subordinate officers. Orders passed by unauthorized officers are void, affecting appellate proceedings under the Act.