9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y slightly in each appeal). Ld. counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice states that application may be disposed of and he waives his right to file reply. 2. The applicants had filed appeals before Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal' for short), New Delhi against order-in-original dated 17-3-2009. By Order dated 25-3-2011, the appeals were dismissed for non-compliance of the Stay Order dated 28-2-2011 as the applicant JMD Oils Pvt. Ltd. had failed to deposit balance amount of '3,64,386/-. We may note that the applicant JMD Oils Pvt. Ltd. had already deposited '26,67,159/- prior to the issue of show cause notice. It is stated in the application that certified copy of the Order dated 25-3-2011 w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mplied with the pre-deposit order dated 1-2-2011. It further records that the appellants were not present and there was no request for adjournment. The Tribunal therefore dismissed the four appeals for non-compliance of the order for pre-deposit as per the provisions of Section 129E of the Act. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties, we frame the following substantial question of law : "Whether the Tribunal was right in dismissing the appeal on 25-3-2011 without noticing the fact whether the appellants had been served with the order dated 1-2-2011 and that the appellants had already deposited duty of '26,67,159/- and only an amount of '3,64,386/- was to be deposited?" 6. The appellants herein had challenged the order-in-origin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... compliance of the direction of pre-deposit under the provision of Section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962. (Dictated & pronounced in the open Court.)" 9. It is apparent from the aforesaid order that the Tribunal did not notice or refer to the fact that the appellant had already made a deposit of Rs. 26,67,159/- and the balance amount payable was only Rs. 3,64,386/-. It is apparent that the Registrar's report did not mention and refer to the said deposit/payment which had already been made by the appellant. The aforesaid error/mistake is extremely important and relevant. Appeal was dismissed vide Order dated 25-3-2011. Thus, the appellants have been denied their right to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
