High Court sets aside Tribunal's decision, emphasizing adherence to precedents for consistency. Appeal allowed, remand for fresh consideration.

The High Court found the Tribunal's failure to consider binding Supreme Court judgments and a Coordinate Bench decision to be flawed. Emphasizing the importance of adhering to judicial precedents for consistency and certainty, the Court set aside the Tribunal's orders. The appeal was allowed, and the waiver of predeposit application was remanded for fresh consideration, clarifying that the Tribunal should decide all merits, including the proper officer issuing the notice to show cause. The Notice of Motion was disposed of accordingly.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against CESTAT orders for waiver of predeposit, failure to consider Supreme Court judgments and Coordinate Bench decision.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged two CESTAT orders directing the Appellant to deposit Rs. 30 lakhs based on an application for waiver of predeposit. The Appellant argued that the Tribunal did not consider the binding precedent set by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs vs. Sayed Ali, asserting that the Additional Director General, DRI lacked jurisdiction to issue a notice to show cause. Despite citing relevant judgments and a Coordinate Bench decision, the Tribunal dismissed the modification application, citing a Karnataka High Court judgment. The High Court admitted the appeal on the substantial question of law regarding the Tribunal's failure to consider the Supreme Court judgments and the Coordinate Bench decision.

The High Court found the Tribunal's approach to be flawed, emphasizing the importance of following binding precedents. It highlighted the necessity for judicial consistency and certainty, stressing the significance of adherence to judicial discipline and respect for precedents. The Court set aside the Tribunal's orders, noting that the Tribunal's approach was inconsistent with judicial principles. The appeal was allowed, and the application for waiver of predeposit was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The Court clarified that all questions on merits, including the proper officer issuing the notice to show cause, are to be decided by the Tribunal. The Notice of Motion was disposed of in light of the appeal's resolution.

---