9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Penalties imposed on appellants for alleged smuggling of scrap from Nepal. Failure to comply with pre-deposit requirement. Appeal for remand based on previous tribunal decision and high court judgment. Analysis: 1. The appellants were engaged in collecting brass scrap for re-melting and manufacturing utensils, facing penalties for alleged smuggling of scrap from Nepal. The appellants argued that penalties were unjust as a similar case had been dropped by the Tribunal, and they had requested a complete stay based on that precedent. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) did not consider this and ordered a deposit of Rs. 2,000 each for the appeal hearing. 2. The Respondent argued that the deposit would not cause undue hardship and cited a Tribunal order in support. The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner's order lacked discussion on the appellants' points and did not consider their variation application for modifying the stay order. The order only directed the deposit without addressing the prima facie aspect of the case. 3. The Tribunal emphasized that if appellants have a prima facie case, pre-deposit would not be justified. Since the Stay Order was passed without considering the appellants' arguments and the variation application, the Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the case to the Commissioner for re-consideration, waiving the pre-deposit requirement. The appeals were allowed by way of remand, with the Commissioner instructed to prioritize and dispose of the matters within three months.
|
