TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1228
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0.09.2019 passed in OTA no.04/2019 is reproduced below: The present appeal is arising out of the order dated 08-03- 2019 passed by the Customs and Service Tax Excise Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 5281/2018 (Rahul Rajvaidhya Vs. Customs Central Excise). 2. The facts of the case reveal that the present appellant has preferred an appeal u/s 129-A of the Customs Act, 1962 and the same has been dismissed vide order dated 08-03-2019 on account of non-compliance of the mandatory required as contained u/s129 (e) of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon an order dated 12-11-2018 passed in Appeal No. C/52173-52177 and other connected matters and his contention is that the si....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....posit clause. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is not in a position to make a pre-deposit due to financial constraint. The order passed by the Tribunal reads as under : Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 provides that the Tribunal shall not entertain any appeal unless the appellant has deposited 7.5% of the duty. This appeal was filed in the Registry on 27 August, 2018 without complying with the aforesaid provision. A communication dated 14 September, 2018 was sent by the Tribunal to the appellant for providing evidence of mandatory deposit and the matter was directed to be listed on 5 October, 2018. The appellant by a letter dated 5 October, 2018 intimated the Tribunal that the appellant is not in a posit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 129A, unless the appellant has deposited ten per cent of the duty demanded or penalty imposed or both, in pursuance of the decision or order appealed against: Provided that the amount required to be deposited under this section shall not exceed rupees ten crores: Provided further that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the stay applications and appeals pending before any appellate authority prior to the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014.'' The aforesaid statutory provision of law makes it very clear that it is mandatory for an appellant to deposit seven and a half percent of the duty demanded or penalty imposed or both. The petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal, nor upon the High Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that the judgment is not binding upon this Court and this Court will certainly not pass an order contrary to the statutory provisions. Reliance has also been placed upon the judgment delivered by the Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Venus Rubbers Vs. The Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise reported in 2014 SCC Online Mad 4667. It was again a case under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and, therefore, distinguishable on facts. Even otherwise also the statutory provisions does not permit for waiver of predeposit. Reliance has also been placed upon the judgment delivered by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Shukla Brothers Vs. Customs, Excise & Service Tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner therein was dismissed. The Delhi High Court after appreciating the fact that petitioner is in great financial difficulty and needs some more time to pay the pre-deposit amount has held that the Court is unable to accede the request and therefore considering the question of financial difficulty dismissed the writ petition. 9. Similar is the view taken in the matter of Pioneer Corporation v. Union of India[2016 (340) E.L.T.63(Del.)]. Para 10 and 11 of the judgment are relevant which reads as under :- "10. Under section 35F of the CE Act as it stood prior to 6th August, 2014, a discretion was available to the CESTAT to consider the financial hardship and accordingly determine the per-deposit amount. That discr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lined to interfere in the matter in respect of finding of fact specially when there was a fraudulent export/over invoicing for claiming undue benefits. The impugned order passed by the Tribunal reads as under :- "This appeal has been filed before the Tribunal under section 129 A of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act on 27 August, 2018 without ensuring compliance of the provisions of Section 129-E of the Act. 2. A communication dated 12 September, 2018 was, accordingly, sent to the appellant by Speed Post requiring the appellant to submit proof of mandatory deposit before the Registrar on 4 October, 2018. The records indicate that on 4 October, 2018 the appellant submitted a letter for dispensing of p....