TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 1059
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessees in terms of the amended provisions of Section 129 E of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. It is seen that the provisions of Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 and Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 which deal with the issue of deposit of dues were amended on 16.8.2014 requiring an appellant to deposit 7.5% / 10% of the duty confirmed against the assessees, at the time of filing of the appeal, as a condition of hearing of the appeal. The said amended provisions were subject matter of various petitions before different High Courts, inasmuch as the assessees, challenged the same on the ground that the said provisions would not apply in cases where the proceedings were initiated prior to 6.8.2014, though the appeals were fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded, consists of a mandatory requirement of pre-deposit for entertaining an appeal before the Appellate Authority i.e., before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal as the case may be, is a piece of procedural legislation and does not fall within the realm of substantive law. Thus, Sections 35 and 35B do not confer an absolute right to file an appeal, but are subscribed or controlled by Section 35F of the Act. Hence, in the instant case, the right to file an appeal under Section 35 or 35B as the case may be is not an absolute right, but a conditional one. (2) In view of a plethora of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is held that in the instant case, the right to file an appeal under Sections 35 and 35B ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the conditions of the amended Section 35F. (7)......... It is learnt that the said decision by the Single Judge of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court stands appealed before the Division Bench but it is found that there is no stay of operation of the said order by the Division Bench. 5. Further, it is found that the issue also stands decided by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Anjani Technoplast Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs [2016 (236) E.L.T. 472 (Del.)] holding that the conditions of mandatory pre-deposit would apply to all the appeals filed on or after 6.8.2014. To the same effect is the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Ganesh Yadav Vs. Union of India [2015 (320) E.L.T. 711 (All.)] as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as exempted the requirement of complying with the pre-deposit as mandated by Section 35F(1) of the Act as amended only in the case of those stay applications and appeals which were pending before any appellate authority prior to the commencement of Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014. Consequently, both by virtue of the opening words of Section 35F(1) of the Act as well as by the second proviso to the provision, it is clear that appeals which are filed on and after the enforcement of the amended provision on 6 August, 2014 shall be governed by the requirement of pre-deposit as stipulated therein. The only category to which the provision will not apply that would be those where the appeals or, as the case may be, stay applications were pending before ....