2016 (11) TMI 615 - HC - Customs

Court waives appeal deposit, prioritizes swift resolution for petitioner's financial relief.

The court waived the requirement for a further deposit of Rs. 15.00 lakhs by the petitioner to entertain the appeal, considering their financial situation ... Pre-deposit - Held that: - Considering the financial stringency being faced by the petitioner and the fact that an amount of ₹ 3,60,000/- has been offered by way of security, which on maturity would amount to more than ₹ 5,00,000/- as claimed by the petitioner’s counsel, we are of the considered view that no deposit need be made by the petitioner and it is a fit case where direction for deletion of the requirement of pre-deposit would support in the ends of justice. Accordingly, we so direct. The writ application is disposed of with direction to the Tribunal to consider the Appeal on its own merit without insisting on any further pre-deposit and take up the matter for early disposal preferably, within a period of six months from today - petition disposed off. Issues:Challenge to order directing deposit of sum for entertaining appeal.Analysis:The case involved a challenge to an order dated 20-4-2015 by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), East Regional Bench, Kolkata, directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 15.00 lakhs within eight weeks as a condition to entertain the appeal. The petitioner, through their counsel, presented financial details indicating gross taxable income and a security deposit of Rs. 3,60,000 offered as per the terms for provisional release of seized stocks. The court, considering the financial situation of the petitioner and the security deposit made, decided that no further deposit was necessary. The court directed the Tribunal to consider the appeal on its merit without insisting on any additional pre-deposit, emphasizing the need for early disposal of the matter, preferably within six months from the date of the order.The judgment highlighted the financial circumstances of the petitioner, the security deposit made, and the decision to waive the requirement of further deposit for entertaining the appeal. The court's direction aimed at ensuring justice by allowing the appeal to be considered on its merit without imposing additional financial burdens on the petitioner. The order emphasized the importance of timely disposal of the matter, indicating the need for the Tribunal to expedite the process within a specified timeframe. The court also instructed the provision of copies of the order to the concerned parties for compliance and further legal proceedings.