Court grants relief to petitioner, appeal allowed without pre-deposit. Financial constraints considered, timely appellate tribunal hearing ordered.

The court granted relief to the petitioner by allowing the appeal against the Order-in-Original without the need for pre-deposit of the penalty amount. The court considered the petitioner's financial constraints, employment status, and previous successful appeal by the proprietor of the Customs House Agent. The court directed the appellate tribunal to hear the appeal on its merits within four weeks, emphasizing that the appeal should proceed without limitations and preserving all rights and contentions of the parties for future proceedings.

---

---

Issues:
1. Petitioner seeking direction for appeal against Order-in-Original without pre-deposit of penalty.
2. Petitioner's employment status and financial circumstances.
3. Previous appeal by the proprietor of Customs House Agent and subsequent development.
4. Court's decision on granting relief to the petitioner for appeal without pre-deposit.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner requested the court to allow the appeal against the Order-in-Original without the need for pre-deposit of the penalty amounting to Rs. 3 crores imposed by the Commissioner (Customs). The petitioner argued being an employee of the Customs House Agent and presented evidence of financial constraints, including bank account details and lease deed of residence.

2. The petitioner clarified being an employee of M/s. Continental Cargo Services, emphasizing Mr. Bhupinder Singh as the proprietor. The adjudication leading to the penalty was based on statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act. The petitioner's financial situation was supported by various documents, prompting the court to consider the circumstances.

3. The court acknowledged the petitioner's financial condition and the previous successful appeal by Mr. Bhupinder Singh, the proprietor of M/s. Continental Cargo Services, at CESTAT. Considering these factors, the court found the petitioner's claim for relief reasonable and decided to grant the appeal without pre-deposit of any amount, directing CESTAT to hear the appeal on its merits within four weeks.

4. In the final decision, the court allowed the writ petition in favor of the petitioner, granting relief by permitting the appeal without pre-deposit of the penalty amount. The court emphasized that the appeal should proceed without being influenced by limitations and reserved all rights and contentions of the parties for future proceedings.

---