Court dismisses appeal challenging Customs Tribunal order due to insufficient security deposit, emphasizing cash requirement.

The Court dismissed the petition challenging the order of the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. It held that a debit entry of ? 7 lakhs in the ledger was insufficient as a security deposit, emphasizing the need for a cash deposit. The petitioner's failure to comply with the deposit direction led to the dismissal of the appeal under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. Despite the opportunity to make a cash deposit, the petitioner's inability to do so rendered the ledger entry inadequate, resulting in the dismissal of the petition without costs.

---

---

Issues: Challenge to order of Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal; Interpretation of deposit requirement; Adequacy of debit entry in ledger; Compliance with direction for deposit; Cash deposit as security requirement.

The judgment pertains to a challenge against an order of the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner sought to make a debit entry of Rs. 7 lakhs in the ledger, claiming it as a deposit in line with the Tribunal's earlier order. However, the Court found that the debit entry could not be considered a sufficient deposit of security against the amount due, emphasizing that the petitioner must make a cash deposit as security. The Court highlighted that the credit assumed for the debit entry may not materialize, and without it becoming an asset, the petitioner cannot claim it to discharge the liability. The Court noted that the petitioner failed to comply with the direction for deposit, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.

Furthermore, the judgment pointed out that the order directing the pre-deposit was not under challenge, and it must be understood that the petitioner was required to make a cash deposit as security. Despite being given the opportunity to deposit Rs. 7 lakhs in cash, the petitioner expressed inability to do so. Consequently, the Court found the debit entry in the ledger to be inadequate and dismissed the petition, emphasizing the necessity of a cash deposit as security in such circumstances. The judgment concluded by dismissing the petition without any order as to costs.

---