2015 (8) TMI 829 - AT - Customs

Waiver of pre-deposit - Imposition of Pre-Deposit Condition while remanding back the matter Application for modification was made against order of Tribunal wherein Tribunal had directed appellant to make pre-deposit of 25% of penalty imposed and on such compliance lower authorities to hear appeal on merits While relying upon Maa Mahamaya Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Visakhapatnam 2014 (11) TMI 747-Andhra Pradesh High Court appellant prayed that proceedings be held invalid abinitio and if case was remanded back condition of pre-deposit may be waived Held that - since there was no order on merits passed by lower appellate authority, therefore remand was ordered Order to make pre-deposit of 25% of penalty was imposed with prima facie view that appellant did not conspire with exporter in mis-declaration of IEC code Tribunal has absolute power while considering appeal to amend, modify and nullify orders of lower authorities Therefore, conditions of pre-deposit of 25% of penalty imposed cannot be said to be contrary to law Thus, no any merit in application for modification found Decided against Assesse.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of show-cause notice and limitation period.
2. Waiver of pre-deposit condition.
3. Exoneration from penal proceedings.
4. Authority to amend, modify, and nullify orders.
5. Power of the Tribunal to impose conditions for hearing appeals.

Analysis:

1. The appellant sought to declare the proceedings invalid abinitio and the show-cause notice as time-barred. Citing relevant case laws, the appellant requested waiver of the pre-deposit condition and exoneration from penal proceedings. However, with no representation from the appellant, the Additional Commissioner argued that the matter was remanded for a decision on merits, allowing the appellant to raise issues before the lower appellate authority. The order of pre-deposit was viewed as a prima facie measure, not hindering the final order's passage. The Tribunal considered all submissions and records, noting the absence of an order on merits by the lower appellate authority, leading to the remand decision.

2. The Tribunal clarified its power to amend, modify, and nullify lower authority orders, including the imposition of necessary conditions for appeal hearings. The Tribunal's authority was deemed consistent with the Customs Act, allowing for the pre-deposit condition of 25% of the penalty. Referring to a recent decision, the Tribunal emphasized its discretion in imposing conditions even when remanding a case, as per the High Court's ruling. The appellant was granted the chance to raise time-bar issues before the lower appellate authority.

3. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no merit in the modification application and rejected it. However, the deadline for pre-deposit was extended, enabling the lower appellate authority to decide on merits post-compliance. The Tribunal's decision highlighted the appellant's opportunity to address time-bar concerns during the lower appellate authority's review. The judgment emphasized the Tribunal's broad powers in amending orders and setting conditions for appeal hearings, ensuring a fair and thorough review process.

This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the Tribunal's considerations regarding the modification application and the legal principles governing the imposition of conditions for appeal hearings in such cases.