9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd contentions raised in the memorandum of appeal, to be argued at the stage of final hearing of the appeal - No reason to interfere with Tribunal's order - Decided against assessee. - C.S.T.A. Nos. 2, 10 & 11 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 9-1-2014 - DILIP B. BHOSALE AND B. MANOHAR, JJ. Kiran S. Javali for the Appellant ORDER Dilip B. Bhosale, J. These appeals are directed against the orders dated 27.12.2012 and 25.02.2013 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench at Bangalore (for short 'the CESTAT'), rejecting an application bearing Misc. Order No.25230/2013 in Customs Appeal Nos.919, 929 599/2010. The appeals were directed against the order dated 30.11.2009 passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner of Customs. In other words, he submitted that since the appellant, on merits of the case is not liable to pay any duty and interest as per the order dated 30.11.2009, the CESTAT was not justified in asking the appellant to deposit the amount, as aforementioned, without examining the challenge of its correctness and legality. He submitted that the CESTAT also failed to consider, whether the appellant is entitled for depreciation as per the Board Circular dated 5.6.1992 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Central Board of Excise and Customs, Government of India. 4. We have perused the impugned order as well as the orders dated 27.12.2012, 25.02.2013 and so also the order passed by the Commissioner dated 30.11.2009. We have also peruse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined and accepted, that would defeat the very object of the provisions contained in Section 129E of the Act. That apart, in the present case, dispensation of deposit of the amount was not sought on the ground that it would cause undue hardship to the appellant. 7. In our opinion, having considered the intendment of the legislature in introducing the provisions contained in section 129E of the Act, it is not open to the appellant to seek dispensation on merits of the case and it is mandatory for such appellant to deposit the amount, as contemplated under Section 129E of the Act, without prejudiced to his rights and contentions raised in the memorandum of appeal, to be argued at the stage of final hearing of the appeal. 8. We do not fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
