9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 892X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms, Kandla (2006 -TMI - 89833 - CESTAT, MUMBAI), laying down that delay of over 10 years in complying with the pre-deposit order should not result in extinguishing the statutory right to appeal - The appellants are directed to deposit the above amount of Rs. Two lakhs within a period of six weeks and report compliance to Commissioner (Appeals), who would, after ascertaining compliance with the above order, decide the appeal on merits - Thus, the Stay petition as also appeal get disposed off X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovember and December 2009, whereas such deposits were required to be made by the appellant by 29.11.2007. As such, there was delay in depositing the amounts. He took note of the Tribunal s order and held that inasmuch as, the deposits were note made in terms of the stay order passed by the Tribunal, appeal is liable to be dismissed on that short ground itself. He ordered accordingly, hence the present appeal. 4. For better appreciation, we reproduce Para-7 and 8 of Commissioner (Appeals) order as below :- 7. I find that the appellant was not at all obeying the orders of Commissioner (Appeals) and the Hon'ble CESTAT and adopted a delaying tactic. This attitude of the appellant is deplorable and not tolerable. I find that in the order No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pon them. Instead of depositing amount in question, they preferred to get their appeal dismissed by Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of non-compliance of the stay order and to prefer appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal in the stay orders directed the appellant to comply with the stay order passed by Commissioner (Appeals). However, the period to deposit the same was extended and the matter was remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits. Inasmuch as the appellant did not deposit the amount in question, within the period granted by the Tribunal and again approached the Tribunal for extension of time, the same was also extended in the interest of justice. 6. It is seen that instead of getting the time extended, repeatedly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is directed to be made. As such, when the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a part amount of Rs. 3 Lakhs within a specified period, they were duty bound to deposit the same. Having not done that, the appeal was required to be dismissed for non compliance with the stay order read with Section 35F of Central Excise Act, unless the appellant deposits the entire dues and restores their right to appeal. We, as such, find no infirmity in the view adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals), who was, in any case, bound by the directions of the Tribunal. 9. At this stage, while agreeing with the legal proposition that the appellant s right to appeal should not be extinguished for late deposit of directed amount, we direct the applicant to dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
