<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (3) TMI 650 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450869</link>
    <description>The Delhi HC dismissed appeals challenging the Tribunal&#039;s rejection of appeals for non-compliance with pre-deposit orders under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962. The court held that while Section 129E does not expressly provide for appeal rejection due to non-compliance, it makes pre-deposit of duty/penalty obligatory during appeal proceedings. The Appellate Authority cannot hear appeals on merits without Section 129E compliance, making rejection the logical consequence of non-compliance. The appellants&#039; waiver applications were dismissed, and they failed to comply with deposit orders, justifying the Tribunal&#039;s dismissal of their appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2024 07:53:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=746995" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 650 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450869</link>
      <description>The Delhi HC dismissed appeals challenging the Tribunal&#039;s rejection of appeals for non-compliance with pre-deposit orders under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962. The court held that while Section 129E does not expressly provide for appeal rejection due to non-compliance, it makes pre-deposit of duty/penalty obligatory during appeal proceedings. The Appellate Authority cannot hear appeals on merits without Section 129E compliance, making rejection the logical consequence of non-compliance. The appellants&#039; waiver applications were dismissed, and they failed to comply with deposit orders, justifying the Tribunal&#039;s dismissal of their appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>