2009 (5) TMI 554

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....et Industries. Shri Piyush Kumar submits that his client Shri Vinay Jain faced a penalty of Rs. 27,10,90,863/-. A common stay order was passed in respect of all the four litigants on 13-10-08 [2009 (235) E.L.T. 761 (Tri. - Del.)]. According to him, there was no direction by Tribunal to Shri Vinay Jain for making a pre-deposit. 2. Ld. DR Shri Sumit Kumar submits that all the four litigants were dealt by a common stay order dated 13-10-08 [2009 (235) E.L.T. 761 (Tri.-Del.)]. That stay order was before the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad. Partial relief was granted by Hon'ble High Court [2009 (236) E.L.T. 214 (All.)]. In spite of that order, the litigants did not comply to the order of Hon'ble High Court. They went to Hon'ble Supreme ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....;Heard both sides and perused the record. 3.2 In absence of certified copy of order passed by Apex Court on 30-3-09, we waited for such copy. We have noticed that the above three appellants except Shri Vinay Jain had filed review petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In view of the prayer by the three appellants except Shri Vinay Jain on 30th April, 09, we adjourned the matter to 8-5-09 to ascertain status of the review application before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. There is an application filed by Smt. Sangeeta Bhalla before Tribunal verifying the same on 6th May, 2009 stating that on receipt of the order dated 30-4-09 passed by Tribunal as aforesaid by M/s. Novamet Industries on 5-5-09, the appellant filed an application on 6....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lling condition of pre-deposit. The facts and circumstances of the cases does not suggest whether they have fulfilled the conditions. On this ground alone their appeals call for dismissal. We have noticed that three appellants as aforesaid have been approaching this Tribunal for modification applications after order dated 30-3-2009 was passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as aforesaid. We are helpless at this stage to consider prayer of the appellants to hear their appeal on merit. We have also noticed that even case of Shri Vinay Jain does not require any lenient consideration in absence of the condition being fulfilled by the principal appellants as per order passed by Tribunal on 30-10-08. We are not able to trace any material whether Shr....