9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 947X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of ₹ 50 lakhs for the adjudication proceedings to be finalized - petition disposed off. - W.P. (W) No. 14687 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 22-6-2017 - Debangsu Basak, J. Shri Nirmal Kumar Chowdhury, Arijit Chakraborty and Nilotpal Chowdhury, for the Petitioner. Shri Amitabrata Roy, for the Respondent. ORDER Two orders passed by the Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the appeal. However, CESTAT had recorded that the authorized representative of the petitioner had offered ₹ 50 lakhs. It is an erroneous recording. The petitioner had applied for correction of such erroneous recording. Such application was dismissed by one of the impugned order dated August 11, 2016. Referring to the other impugned order passed by CESTAT dated January 14, 2016, learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-condition of deposit as directed. 5. I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and the materials available on record. 6. It appears from the records that a show cause notice dated October 17, 2012 was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner had responded thereto. The Adjudicating Authority had taken the matter for consideration. In the adjudication proceedings, several witnes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -condition for deposit of ₹ 50 lakhs. CESTAT has given a reason that, the petitioner had offered to deposit ₹ 50 lakhs. With respect, the offer, if at all, was made for the admission of the appeal. Such offer, if at all made, will not bind the Appellate making such offer for the purpose of making it a pre-condition to have the original proceedings heard and disposed of. 8. In such c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
