High Court affirms tribunal's dismissal of appeal for failure to comply with Customs Act deposit requirement.

The High Court upheld the tribunal's decision to dismiss the appellant's appeal for failure to comply with the requirement of depositing a percentage of the duty demanded or penalty imposed under section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's argument regarding the applicability of the amendment to section 129-E was rejected, and it was determined that the tribunal's order was legally sound. The appeal was dismissed as it did not present any significant legal issues for consideration.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal challenging tribunal's order under section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The appellant's appeal was dismissed by the tribunal for failing to comply with the requirement of depositing a percentage of the duty demanded or penalty imposed under section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal found that the appellant did not deposit 7.5% of the penalty amount as required by the section, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without adjudication. The tribunal granted sufficient time for compliance, but the appellant failed to meet the condition by the specified date. The second proviso of section 129-E exempts stay applications and appeals pending before any appellate authority prior to the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014, which was not applicable in this case. The appellant argued that the order-in-original was dated before the amendment of section 129-E, but this argument was previously rejected by a Division Bench and other judgments, including the Allahabad High Court ruling in the case of Ganesh Yadav. The High Court upheld the tribunal's decision, stating that the amended provision of section 129-E was correctly applied, and there was no legal flaw in the tribunal's order. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as it did not raise any substantial question of law.

---