9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 25,000/- Non-compliance of the Stay Order - applicant had failed to deposit – held that:- Keeping in view the aforesaid position we answer the question of law mentioned above in affirmative and in favour of the appellant-assessee and the appeal is allowed. - Appeal restored before tribaunal. - C.M. Nos. 6521, 6544, 6548 and 6556 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 13-4-2012 - Sanjiv Khanna and R.V. Easwar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Ms. Shikha Sapra, Ms. Reena Rawat Shri Ankit Roopanwal, Advocates, for the Appellant. S/Shri Kamal Nijhawan, Sr. Standing Counsel with Kukud Nighawan and Sumit Gaur, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order]. CM 6520/2012 in CUSAA 10/2012, CM 6545/2012 in CUSAA 11/2012, CM 6549/2012 in CUSAA 12/2012, CM 6555 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere taken and present appeals have been filed. 3. In view of the facts and circumstances, we allow the applications subject to payment of consolidate cost of 25,000/-, which will be paid to the Commissioner of Customs by way of a demand draft within 4 weeks. In case the said cost is not paid within 4 weeks by sending a demand draft by registered post to the Commissioner of Customs, the application will be treated as dismissed. CUSAA 10/2012 CUSAA 11/2012, CUSAA 12/2012, CUSAA 13/2012 4. These appeals under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 ( Act for short) have been preferred against the order dated 25-3-2011 passed by Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi ( Tribunal , for short). In these appeals impugned o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. The Tribunal in the order dated 1-2-2011 observed that this was a fair proposition and they had ordered accordingly. 7. It is stated that the appellant-JMD Oils Ltd. had already deposited an amount of Rs. 26,67,159 prior to the issue of show cause notice itself. Thus, the appellant-company namely, JMD Oils Pvt. Ltd. was only required to deposit Rs. 3,64,386/-. The other appellants were not specifically asked to deposit any amount. 8. On 25-3-2011, the following order was passed by the Tribunal : The appellants are not represented. There is also no adjournment request. As per Registrar s report dated 21-3-2011, the appellants have not complied with the pre-deposit order dated 1-2-2011. No compliance report has also been filed af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
