9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of pre-deposit of the penalty amount. In the facts and circumstances of the case and when the appellants not being attributed any direct role in relation to the under-valuation of goods, the Tribunal should not have imposed a condition which prejudicially affects the right of the appeal conferred on the appellant by law. For all these reasons, we direct that on a deposit of the sum of ₹ 2, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S.C. Dharmadhikari and B.P. Colabawalla, JJ. Shri Bharat Raichandani i/b. Rajan Mishra, for the Appellant. Shri Pradeep S. Jetly, for the Respondent. ORDER Mentioned not on board. In the light of the urgency made out, the appeal is taken up for admission. 2. The appeal is directed against the order of pre-deposit. The contention before us is that the applicant is a Karta of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the light of these submissions, we are of the opinion that appeal deserves admission. It is admitted on the following substantial questions of law : - (i) Whether the Tribunal erred in directing the deposit of a sum of ₹ 5,00,000/- by the HUF as also separately by the appellant? (ii) Whether the Tribunal should have found as to whether a prima facie case as has been made out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in so far as the amount of penalty directed against the appellant. Meaning thereby the appellant would not be required to deposit the sum of ₹ 1,00,000/- as directed by the Tribunal, in the event, our order passed today is complied by the HUF. If the order is not complied with, then, the direction issued by the Tribunal shall revive and non-compliance the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
