9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (10) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 20-12-1999 which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) by his order dated 19-3-2001. Having heard on the application for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 2,35,000/- and having considered the financial hardship of the petitioner, the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, West Regional Bench at Mumbai ("CEGAT" for short) by its order dated 21-1-2002 (Annexure-B) directed the applicant petitioner to deposit Rs. 1 lakh within one month from the date of receipt of the order. Thus, the petitioner was supposed to deposit amount of Rs. 1 lakh by 21-2-2002. Instead the petitioner had deposited only Rs. 50,000/- on 18-2-2002 by challan at Annexure-C and simultaneously applied before the CEGAT for extension of time to deposit fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Tri.) = 2002 (53) RLT 103 was not relied on the ground that it was passed on facts of that case. Hence, this petition. 3.Learned Counsel Shri Maru for the petitioner submitted that there was a delay of hardly two months and twenty days in complying with the predeposit order passed the CEGAT by the petitioner. He submitted that in view of the pre-deposit order dated 21-1-2002 (Annexure-B) passed by the CEGAT the petitioner had deposited 50% of the amount i.e. Rs. 50,000/- out of Rs. 1 lakh at the first instance within the period of one month as ordered by the CEGAT, but due to its poor financial condition, the petitioner was not in a position to deposit remaining Rs. 50,000/- immediately. Therefore, it had applied for extension of time whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Annexure 'E' and Annexure 'A' respectively passed by the CEGAT we are of the considered opinion that though there was a delay of about two months and twenty days in complying with the pre-deposit order passed by the CEGAT, on peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it should have granted the restoration application and restored the appeal of the petitioner which was dismissed by it on 30-4-2002 on the ground of non-compliance of the pre-deposit order. 6.In view of the above discussion, this petition is allowed and application at Annexure 'G' for restoration of main appeal filed before the CEGAT is accepted by quashing and setting aside the impugned order Annexure 'A' dated 10-6-2003 passed by the CEGAT. Once the application for resto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
