9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l despite of the fact that thee is no time limit for restoration of appeal? - Held That:- Tribunal could have rendered substantial justice by giving an opportunity to Appellant and appeal could have been restored - Tribunal shall restore and revive the appeal after encashing the DD and if submission of costs quantified at ₹ 25,000/- done within two weeks - Decided conditionally in favour of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t out in paragraph 5 and in such an appeal which resulted out of adjudication and penalty proceedings, the appellant applied for dispensation of the condition of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending the hearing and final disposal of the statutory appeal. The Tribunal entertained such an application and on 10th September, 2009 directed that on the appellant depositing a sum of ₹ 10,00,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of a writ petition being Writ Petition No. 1687 of 2011 which also came to be dismissed on 12th March, 2014. In such circumstances, the restoration application was dismissed as time barred. 6. After hearing Mr Raichandani and Mr Jetly, we are of the opinion that on the understanding of the Tribunal of the legal provisions a substantial question of law arises for our determination. The appeal is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould have rendered substantial justice by giving an opportunity to the appellant as the appellant had furnished the demand draft in the sum of ₹ 10,00,000/- to the Commissioner of Customs (Imports, JNPT, Nava Sheva) Taluka Uran, District Raigad on 24th July,2014. By imposing suitable conditions, the appellant's appeal could have been restored to file for disposal on merits in accordance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
