9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 801X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... towards penalty amount out of the total penalty amount of Rs. 7.5 lacs imposed on each applicant as pre-condition of hearing of the appellants appeal. After passing of the said order the applicants forwarded two miscellaneous applications which were also disposed by the Tribunal vide its order Nos. M-710-711, dated 22-9-1999 but in the interest of justice the period to deposit was extended upto 15-11-1999. However instead of complying with the said order, the applicants moved another application for modification of the order. The said modification application was taken up for disposal vide the above referred order dated 21-12-1999. After rejecting the request of the appellants, the appeals were also dismissed for non-compliance of provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been disposed of after hearing the appeals on merits. It is made clear that the appellants right to file the appeal and pursue the same before Tribunal is subject to the condition of pre-deposit under Section 129E of the Customs Act and they were required to cross the above obstacle under the law before their appeals could be disposed of on merits. This having not been done by them, we do not find any justifiable reason for restoring the appeals. 3. At this stage we also observe that the Hon ble Gujarat High Court reported in 1995 (77) E.L.T. 803 (Guj.) in the case of Hussein Haji Harun v. U.O.I. holding that the appeal dismissed for non-compliance can be restored inasmuch as the Tribunal has an inherent power. There cannot be any quarr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pari materia to the provisions of Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962. In para 7 of the said judgment, a reference has been made to the Hon ble Supreme Court for decision in the case of Navin Chandra Chhotelal v. C.B.E. C. and Others reported in 1981 E.L.T. 679 (S.C.) wherein while interpreting the provisions of Section 129 of the Customs Act, it has been held that the Appellate Authority has got discretion either to waive the entire amount or reduce the quantum of such duty and penalty and it is obligatory on the part of the appellants to deposit such duty or penalty pending the appeal failing which, the Appellate Authority is fully competent to reject the Appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of said Section. 5. Following the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
