Failure to Comply with Pre-Deposit Order Leads to Dismissal of Review Petition under FERA

The High Court dismissed the review petition against the penalty order imposed under FERA, emphasizing the petitioner's failure to comply with the pre-deposit order for filing an appeal. The Court rejected the distinction between procedural review and review on merits, stating the statutory obligation to file an appeal with the penalty amount unless dispensation is granted. The lack of bonafide on the petitioner's part led to the dismissal of the appeal, with the Court underscoring the importance of compliance with procedural requirements and statutory obligations under FERA.

---

---

Issues:
1. Dismissal of review petition against the order imposing a penalty under FERA.
2. Distinction between procedural review and review on merits.
3. Compliance with pre-deposit order for filing an appeal.

Issue 1: Dismissal of review petition against penalty order
The petitioner imported Tin Plates utilizing allocated foreign exchange, cleared goods from Customs, and faced allegations of non-utilization of allocated foreign exchange. The Adjudicating Authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 28,26,000 on the petitioner. The petitioner filed an appeal seeking waiver of the pre-deposit of the penalty amount. Despite delays and dismissal due to non-representation, the review petition was ultimately dismissed on 11th November, 2009 by majority order under Section 52(6) of FERA.

Issue 2: Distinction between procedural review and review on merits
The petitioner argued for a distinction between procedural review and review on merits, citing the decision in Minas Minerais De Goa Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India. The Tribunal, in an earlier order, considered the appeal and application for withdrawal of the pre-deposit order on merits even in the absence of the petitioner's counsel. The Tribunal rejected the review application due to the petitioner's failure to establish grounds for review, emphasizing the statutory obligation to file an appeal along with the penalty amount unless dispensation is granted.

Issue 3: Compliance with pre-deposit order for filing an appeal
The Tribunal highlighted the importance of complying with the pre-deposit order for filing an appeal under FERA. The petitioner's failure to comply with the pre-deposit order, despite indulgence shown by the Tribunal, led to the dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of bonafide on the petitioner's part and dismissed the appeal accordingly. The petitioner's alternate submission for depositing the amount at a later stage was not considered as it was not raised during the relevant proceedings.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the petition, emphasizing the statutory obligations under FERA and the lack of merit in the petitioner's arguments. The judgment highlighted the importance of compliance with procedural requirements and the distinction between procedural review and review on merits in such cases.

---