Pre-deposit non-compliance and unexplained delay defeated the appeals after the Tribunal found no credible basis for condonation.

Delay in complying with a Tribunal pre-deposit direction was not condoned because the applicants offered no credible explanation for years of non-compliance. The claim that the file was not traceable and that payment was not accepted was found unreliable, especially in the absence of contemporaneous intimation to the Tribunal and a satisfactory basis for a belated affidavit. The record showed that the order had been duly dispatched, and the prolonged default remained unexplained. As a result, the appeals failed for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement under the Customs Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in complying with the Tribunal's pre-deposit direction could be condoned and the appeals maintained despite non-compliance under the Customs Act.

Analysis: The applicants were directed to deposit the stipulated amount within the prescribed time, but compliance was not reported for several years. The explanation that the file was allegedly not traceable and that payment was not accepted was found unreliable and improbable, particularly because there was no satisfactory basis for the affidavit filed long after the alleged events and no contemporaneous intimation to the Tribunal. The record showed that the order had been duly dispatched, and the absence of a credible explanation for the prolonged default weighed against the applicants.

Conclusion: The inordinate delay was not condoned and the appeals failed for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement.

---