TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (8) TMI 109
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stions involved in these two appeals are identical. The appellants' claim to be the citizens of India is not disputed. At the material time in 1983 they were based in Hong Kong and Singapore respectively. 2.In February, 1983, when the appellants came to India, they were charged with alleged offences under Sections 112 and 114 of the Act and also simultaneously with the alleged offences under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter called 'the FERA'). The Enforcement authorities recorded under Section 40 of the FERA the appellants' statements at the time of their arrest. It is alleged that these statements were obtained under duress and by using third degree methods against them, who soon thereafter retracted their statements....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... each of the appellants. 4.It is alleged that since neither of the appellants were in any financial position to deposit even Rs. 1 lakh, they sought further reduction. The Appellate Tribunal, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration all the relevant material facts and factors, by its order dated 17th February, 1987, declined to do so and dismissed the appeals for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 129E of the Act. Aggrieved thereby the appellants have appealed to this Court. Section 129E of the Act provides as follows :- "Where in any appeal under this Chapter, the decision or order appealed against relates to any duty demanded in respect of goods which are not under the control of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... judicial discretion of the Appellate Authority. 6.The case of the appellant was that they had not gone out of India and had no assets in India. Their passports were impounded at the time of arrest. Their VISA had lapsed and could not be renewed. They had no money, hence, the right of appeal could be illusory unless they are permitted to deposit only Rs. 60,000/- each which they contend they are able to procure with the assistance of their father. 7.In the impugned order the Tribunal noted the several abortive and defective attemps made to get extension of time to deposit the security. Firstly, the prayer was to accept the deposit of Rs. 35,000/- and secondly, to accept the deposit of Rs. 60,000/- in 2 months. The Tribunal took into accou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is the right of appeal as contemplated under Sections 129A and 129E of the Act and that right is a conditional one and the Legislature in its wisdom has imposed that condition. No question of whittling down that right by an alteration of procedure arises in this case. 9.Right to appeal is neither an absolute right nor an ingredient of natural justice the principles of which must be followed in all judicial and quasi-judicial adjudications. The right to appeal is a statutory right and it can be circumscribed by the conditions of the grant. 10.Counsel referred us to the decision of this Court in Collector of Customs & Excise, Cochin & Ors. v. A.S. Bava [(1968 1 SCR 82) = 1978 E.L.T. (J 333)]. There this Court found that Section 35 of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on and thus a conditional right. The petitioner in this case has no absolute right of stay. He could obtain stay of realisation of tax levied or penalty imposed in an appeal subject to the limitations of Section 129E. The proviso gives a discretion to the authority to dispense with the obligation to deposit in case of "undue hardships". The discretion must be exercised on relevant materials, honestly, bona fide and objectively. Once that position is established it cannot be contended that there was any improper exercise of the jurisdiction by the Appellate Authority. In this case it is manifest that the order of the Tribunal was passed honestly, bona fide and having regard to the plea of 'undue hardship' as canvassed by the appellant. There....