1990 (6) TMI 133 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure to deposit penalty amount in appeal.
2. Challenge to vires of Customs Act and Import (Control) Order.
3. Request for waiver of pre-deposit condition.
4. Composite appeal seeking relief from confiscation and penalty.
5. Interpretation of Section 129E of the Customs Act.

Issue 1: Failure to Deposit Penalty Amount
The appellant failed to deposit the penalty amount as required by the Special Bench 'A' order, leading to the dismissal of the stay petition. Despite the appellant's non-compliance, the matter was transferred to the North Regional Bench.

Issue 2: Challenge to Vires of Customs Act and Import Order
The appellant filed a Special Civil Application in the High Court challenging the validity of Sec. 111 of the Customs Act and clause 11(m) of the Import (Control) Order. The High Court admitted the petition, which is pending hearing.

Issue 3: Request for Waiver of Pre-Deposit Condition
The appellant sought interim relief from the pre-deposit condition of the penalty amount, but the High Court rejected this prayer. The matter was scheduled for further hearing, and the appellant was called upon to show cause for non-compliance.

Issue 4: Composite Appeal Seeking Relief
The appellant's appeal challenged the confiscation of a motor car and the imposition of a penalty, seeking two distinct reliefs. The appellant argued that the appeal for confiscation relief should be heard on merit even though the penalty pre-deposit condition was not met.

Issue 5: Interpretation of Section 129E
The Tribunal analyzed Section 129E of the Customs Act, which mandates the deposit of penalty pending appeal. The Tribunal referred to legal precedents, including a Gujarat High Court judgment and a Supreme Court decision, to determine that failure to pre-deposit penalty could lead to dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty and confiscation are interlinked, and setting aside one would necessitate setting aside the other.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's failure to deposit the penalty amount, citing legal precedents and the interconnection between penalty and confiscation orders. The judgment highlighted the importance of complying with pre-deposit conditions for appeals involving penalties under the Customs Act.