9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw that application for waiver of pre-deposit, relevant considerations for Tribunal was whether appellant made out prima facie case and whether any financial hardship was established – So far as question of prima facie case was concerned, Director - STPI passed order against appellant which binds authorities under Customs Act and that in view of said order of Director, appellant could not make out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst which the statutory appeal is filed before the Tribunal. By the impugned order, the Tribunal held that the appellant has failed to establish any merit in the appeal and also the case of financial hardship that was pleaded. On that basis the appellant was directed to deposit the duty demanded within six weeks. It is this order which is under challenge before us. 2. We heard the learned coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of pre- deposit, on an earlier occasion, the Tribunal had passed an order requiring the appellant to deposit the duty demanded and report compliance on 29.01.2015. The amount was not deposited and as there was no representation on behalf of the appellant on 29.01.2015, the case was dismissed. However, the order passed by the Tribunal requiring deposit of the duty demanded was set aside by this Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that though a writ petition has been filed against the said order, no interlocutory orders was passed by this Court. On this basis, the Tribunal has rightly held that the order passed by the Director - STPI binds the authorities under the Customs Act and that in view of the said order of the Director, the appellant could not make out a prima facie case in their favour. In so far as the issue of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
