2015 (3) TMI 817

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder running into 66 pages, directed the Appellant before us to deposit a sum of Rs. 1 crore , meaning thereby, it did not waive the condition of pre-deposit in its entirety. The Appellant/ Assessee could not comply with this condition, therefore , its Appeal was dismissed . Later on, two applications were made, firstly to relieve the Appellant/ Assessee from this condition or in the alternative to give some time by reducing the amount initially demanded. Even these applications have been dismissed. 2. Mr. Desai-learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Assessee submits that the Appeal raises substantial questions of law. They are formulated as under :- "A) Whether the CESTAT is justified in dismissing the Appeal of the Appellant only on f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....there is nothing left for argument at the hearing of the Appeal. Even if the Appellant had complied with the condition of predeposit , he would have faced several adverse findings and conclusions in the order of the Tribunal on the application seeking waiver of the condition of predeposit . 4. Alternatively, Mr. Desai would submit that assuming a lengthy order was required, yet, the basic material should have been taken into consideration. The fundamental and basic material and in terms of subsection (1) of section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 is the valuation on the basis of the price prevailing in the export market and of the goods which are subject matter of importation by the Assessee . This aspect has been completely omitted from consi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dismissed. 6. After having heard both sides, we are of the view that the Tribunal's order imposing a condition of predeposit of Rs. 1 crore and thereafter rejecting the Appeal for non compliance raises at least two substantial questions of law. They are formulated as under: "a) Whether the CESTAT is justified in directing the Appellant for predeposit of Rs. 1 crore when the impugned orders are contrary to section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Notification No. 95 of 2007 - Cus ( N.T .) dated 13th September, 2007 thereunder? b) Whether the provisions of section 28(1) and section 125 of Customs Act, 1962 are applicable to the facts of this case at all? If not, whether the order of adjudicating authority, predeposit order of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....final hearing. They are to be taken up seriatim. Therefore, the Tribunal must ensure that it gets adequate time to take up the Appeals and for final disposal, so that the parties and lower authorities are guided not only in terms of interpretation and exposition of law by the Tribunal's final orders and for application to given facts and circumstances. That is equally the duty of the Tribunal as a last fact finding authority and while supervising the subordinate authorities. We wonder if the Tribunal has passed such a lengthy order at the interlocutory stage, when it will get time for all this. In the present case, the Tribunal has referred to the conflicting views and opinions of different High Courts. It has also referred to several c....