2011 (1) TMI 1167 - HC - Customs

Pre-deposit - Whether the appellate Tribunal was justified in imposing pre-deposit condition in a matter which arises out of remand proceedings when on earlier occasion in the same proceedings the appeal was entertained without pre-deposit condition Held that - on the modification application filed by the appellant the Tribunal had reduced the amount of pre-deposit to 20 lakhs. However on account of non-compliance of the said order vide the impugned order the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant appellant has submitted that since the appeal is of the year 2007 the Tribunal be directed to dispose of the same at an early date. The said request appears to be reasonable. In the circumstances the Tribunal is requested to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal for non-compliance of section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962; Imposition of pre-deposit condition; Compliance with tribunal's directions on pre-deposit amount; Restoration of appeal on grounds of substantial compliance with pre-deposit order.

Analysis:
The appellant challenged the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal for non-compliance with section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant raised thirteen substantial questions of law regarding the imposition of a pre-deposit condition in remand proceedings, compliance with de-novo proceedings, financial crisis justifying pre-deposit, and the dismissal of the appeal for non-deposition of the pre-deposit amount. The appellant had deposited Rs.20 lakhs in compliance with the tribunal's order, which was reduced from an initial Rs.30 lakhs. Despite the deposit, the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance. The court noted the substantial compliance with the tribunal's order and restored the appeal for a decision on merits.

The Tribunal had initially directed the appellant to deposit Rs.30 lakhs, which was later reduced to Rs.20 lakhs on a modification application. The appellant complied by depositing the reduced amount, but the appeal was still dismissed for non-compliance. The court observed that the directions in the tribunal's order had been substantially met, leading to the restoration of the appeal for a decision on merits. The court quashed the impugned order and set aside the dismissal of the appeal, emphasizing the importance of justice being served.

The appellant's compliance with the tribunal's order to deposit Rs.20 lakhs was a crucial factor in the court's decision to restore the appeal. Despite the dismissal based on non-compliance, the court recognized the substantial compliance with the pre-deposit condition and deemed it appropriate to restore the appeal for a decision on merits. The court directed the Tribunal to expedite the disposal of the appeal, considering the prolonged duration of the case since 2007. The restoration of the appeal signified the court's acknowledgment of the appellant's efforts to adhere to the tribunal's directives, ultimately leading to a fair consideration of the case on its merits.