Substantive right of appeal prevails over pre-deposit demand, with appellate and revisional orders quashed.

The right of appeal under Section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was treated as a substantive right, and the requirement of pre-deposit of excise duty by applying Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962 could not curtail that right. Relying on Supreme Court authority invalidating insistence on pre-deposit, the High Court held that the departmental response did not meet the assessee's contention and quashed the appellate and revisional orders. The appeal was directed to be heard without insisting on payment of excise duty.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate and revisional orders rejecting the assessee's appeal for non-deposit of excise duty could be quashed and the appeal directed to be heard without insisting on payment of the duty.

Analysis: The writ petition was governed by the principle that the right of appeal under Section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is a substantive right, and that the requirement of depositing duty introduced by applying Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot whittle down that right. The petitioner had sought review with express reliance on the Supreme Court decision invalidating such insistence on pre-deposit, and the departmental reply treating the revisional order as final did not answer that contention.

Conclusion: The appellate and revisional orders were quashed, and the petitioner's appeal was directed to be heard without insisting on payment of excise duty.

---