9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (8) TMI 137 - AT - Central ExciseAppeal dismissed on technical ground of non-compliance of the direction to make pre-deposit by the stipulated date - assessee contested that he did not comply with the order of pre-deposit because he was pursuing his writ petition filed against the order and subsequently withdrew the appeal and deposited the pre - deposit amount as directed along with balance demand - Held that - The default on the part of the appellant was unintentional and it occurred only because the appellant had challenged the order of pre-deposit in High Court which he withdrew - since the entire amount of duty has been deposited, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the matter is remanded back for hearing afresh for deciding on merits - in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Appeal against dismissal for non-compliance with pre-deposit order. Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi was directed against the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur I, where the appellant's appeal had been dismissed due to the technical ground of failing to comply with the direction to make a pre-deposit of Rs.25 lakhs by a specified date. The appellant's counsel argued that the non-compliance occurred because the appellant was pursuing a writ petition against the original order requiring the deposit. Subsequently, the appellant withdrew the appeal and deposited the entire amount of Rs.25 lakhs along with the balance demand. It was emphasized that the default in compliance was unintentional and stemmed from challenging the pre-deposit order in court. The Revenue representative, Shri N. Pathak, acknowledged that the appeal had been dismissed solely on the technicality of non-compliance with the pre-deposit directive. Given that the appellant had now deposited the full amount of duty, the Revenue had no objections to setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and remanding the matter for a fresh hearing. Consequently, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, overturning the impugned order and remanding the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the merits. This decision was made in light of the appellant's subsequent compliance with the pre-deposit requirement and the acknowledgment by the Revenue that the dismissal was based solely on a procedural issue.
|
