9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (10) TMI 25 - HC - Central ExciseModification of Application Held that - As the order for deposit of the amount was not complied with, the Tribunal had no option but to dismiss the appeal - Once the order of the Appellate Tribunal stood confirmed by the court by order there appears to be no justification for the petitioner to make request before the Tribunal to modify the earlier order - If for want of compliance of the earlier order passed by the Tribunal as confirmed by this court, the appeal had been rejected, there was no error in the order in the appeal.
Issues: Appeal against order of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal for non-compliance with pre-deposit condition.
Detailed Analysis: The appeal was filed against the order of the Member (Judicial) of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The dispute centered around the requirement of depositing 100% of the tax liability for the appeal to be maintainable. The respondent argued that under the Act and the circumstances of the case, it was within the Tribunal's discretion to waive this condition. The Appellate Tribunal had previously allowed the appellant to deposit Rs. 3,70,000, but when this was not done, the appellant's Central Excise Appeal was dismissed by the court on the grounds that the appellant did not present arguments on merits or disclose their financial condition before the Tribunal. Subsequently, the appellant's attempts to modify the order or seek relief were rejected, leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the Tribunal. The High Court confirmed that once its order upholding the Tribunal's decision was passed, there was no justification for the appellant to request a modification of the earlier order. The court found no error in the Tribunal's decision to dismiss the appeal due to non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement. The court emphasized that since the appeal was rejected for failure to comply with the earlier order, the dismissal was justified. The appeal was ultimately deemed to have failed and was consequently dismissed by the court.
|
