2015 (9) TMI 113 - HC - Customs

High Court Directs Tribunal to Reconsider Waiver Application Promptly

The Calcutta High Court directed the Tribunal to consider the application for waiver of pre-deposit within two weeks. The petitioners' appeal was ... Waiver of pre-deposit - dismissal for non-prosecution - condition precedent of payment of costs for hearing - reconsideration by the Tribunal - appeal filed within limitationAppeal filed within limitation - dismissal for non-prosecution - The appeal was filed within the period of limitation but was dismissed by the Tribunal for non-prosecution after repeated adjournments. - HELD THAT: - The Court recorded that the petitioners had preferred the appeal within the period of limitation. The Tribunal, however, noted the petitioners' negligence in prosecuting the appeal, observed their failure to appear despite multiple adjournments, and consequently dismissed the matter. Although the petitioners contended that a change of address had been intimated to the Tribunal office, the Court observed that this was not recorded and did not reverse the Tribunal's finding of non-prosecution. The Court did not finally adjudicate the merits of the appeal on this point but accepted the factual finding of non-prosecution as the reason for dismissal.Finding that the appeal had been filed within limitation but was dismissed by the Tribunal for non-prosecution after repeated adjournments; the High Court did not disturb the Tribunal's factual finding on non-prosecution.Waiver of pre-deposit - condition precedent of payment of costs for hearing - reconsideration by the Tribunal - The application for waiver of pre-deposit was remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration on terms specified by the Court. - HELD THAT: - Noting that the revenue respondents had not initiated any proceedings for recovery of the customs duty, interest and penalty imposed by the impugned order, the High Court directed the Tribunal to consider the petitioners' application for waiver of the pre-deposit. The Court imposed a condition precedent: the petitioners must pay a cost of Rs. 10,000 to the respondents within one week, and only upon such payment will the Tribunal entertain and decide the waiver application on merits within two weeks from communication of the order. The Court expressly recorded that it had not gone into the merits of the waiver application and limited its direction to fresh consideration by the Tribunal subject to the stated condition.Application for waiver of pre-deposit remitted to the Tribunal for consideration on merits within two weeks, conditional upon the petitioners paying costs within one week; the High Court did not decide the merits of the waiver.Final Conclusion: The High Court declined to decide the merits of the pre-deposit waiver, recorded that the appeal was filed within limitation but was dismissed for non-prosecution, and directed the Tribunal to reconsider the waiver application on merits within a stipulated time on the condition that the petitioners first pay the prescribed costs to the respondents. The Calcutta High Court directed the Tribunal to consider the application for waiver of pre-deposit within two weeks. The petitioners were negligent in proceeding with the appeal, leading to its dismissal after multiple adjournments. The Court did not review the merits of the application. The petitioners must pay a cost of Rs. 10,000 to the respondents for the application to be heard.