TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1975 (8) TMI 49
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve Officers seized five pieces of cloth measuring 23.05 metres under Case No. 17/CL/Imp/Prev./Sil/69, dated 9-6-1969, vide T.R.S. No. 25-of Book No. 349, dated 9-6-1969 and Inventory dated 9-6-1969. The petitioner challenged that seizure and also by a statement dated 9-6-1969 explained to the Customs Preventive Officer the licit sources and the character of these goods. The petitioner was served by the Assistant Collector, Customs, with a show cause notice, being C. No. 50/CL/Sil/Cus/69/9299, dated 14/15-7-1969 on the charges mentioned in the show cause memo and he was asked to show cause against the charges mentioned therein. The petitioner showed cause by his petition dated 24-7-1969. By adjudication Order No. Div/S/Sil/1581/Cus/69, dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Customs Act, 1962 are quoted below :- ***** 5. It appears that under Section 128 any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under the Act may, within three months from the date of the communication, against such decision or order, file an appeal to the Appellate Collector of Customs. Section 129 lays down that when the appeal is against the decision or order relating to any duty demanded in respect of goods which are not under the control of customs authorities or any penalty levied under the Act, any person desirous of appealing against such decision or order shall, pending the appeal, deposit with the proper officer the duty demanded or the penalty levied. It has also been provided that where in any particular case the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shows that the appeal is entertainable but during the pendency of the appeal the penalty levied must be paid unless the appellate authority in its discretion dispenses with such deposit unconditionally or subject to such conditions as it may deem fit considering the fact that the deposit of the penalty levied will cause undue hardship to the appellant. So the next question that arises is when the appeal is filed and the appeal is pending, at what point of time the appellant is to pay or deposit the penalty in question. 8. In the instant case we find from the impugned order of the Appellate Collector of Customs that the appeal was taken up on 25th July, 1970 and on that date the Appellate Collector found that there was no justicable reaso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able time to comply with the requirements of sub-section (1) or Section 129, after the appellant is informed about the order of rejection of his prayer made under the proviso to sub-section (l) of Section 129. In that view we hold that impugned order rejecting the appeal immediately after rejecting the prayer made by the appellant for dispensing with the deposit of penalty levied under sub-section (1) of Section 129, is not sustainable in law and as such the order is liable to be quashed. 9. In the revisional order the Revisional Authority has observed that the Appellate Authority is fully competent to reject the appeal for non-compliance with the revisions of sub-section (1) of Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962. Then it has observed ....