2015 (7) TMI 192 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal remands appeal due to delay in depositing pre-deposit amount

M/s S.H. Re-Rolling Mills Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik

The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, setting aside the dismissal by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to a delay in depositing the pre-deposit ... Restoration of appeal - Dismissal of appeal for non compliance with pre deposit order - Held that:- in terms of order of the Tribunal, the deposit was required to be made on or before 20.3.2014 whereas the deposit has been made on 25.3.2014 and accordingly, the same was considered as non-compliance with the direction within the time permitted by this Tribunal - It is seen that the delay is about 6 days in depositing the amount of pre-deposit. In the interest of justice, the delay is condoned and the matter is remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to hear the assessee and dispose off the appeal on merits - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues: Delay in depositing pre-deposit amount leading to appeal dismissalAnalysis:The judgment pertains to a second round of litigation arising from an Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise. In the initial round, the Tribunal had directed the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 25% of the duty amount within a specified time frame. However, the appellant failed to comply with the timeline, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to a delay of 6 days in depositing the required amount.The Commissioner (Appeals) noted the non-compliance with the Tribunal's directive regarding the timeline for the pre-deposit, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The appellant, aggrieved by this decision, approached the Tribunal seeking relief. The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, condoned the delay of 6 days in depositing the pre-deposit amount and remanded the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh hearing to allow the appellant an opportunity to present their case and have the appeal decided on its merits.Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, setting aside the dismissal by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to the delay in depositing the pre-deposit amount. Additionally, the stay application was also disposed of in the course of the judgment. The decision highlights the significance of adhering to timelines set by the Tribunal and the subsequent consequences of non-compliance, while also emphasizing the principle of ensuring justice by granting the appellant an opportunity to present their case before the Commissioner (Appeals).