2025 (4) TMI 710

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 114 and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. The following are the undisputed facts: a) Earlier, the very same petitioner had approached this Court challenging the very same order in original dated 25.03.2023 before this Court by filing writ petitions in W.P. Nos.17616, 17619 and 17626 of 2023; b) By order dated 15.06.2023, the petitioner was directed to exercise the alternative statutory appellate remedy provided under the Customs Act, 1962 and disposed of the said writ petition; c) The petitioner also exercised the statutory appellate remedy by preferring the statutory appeal, aggrieved by the order in original dated 25.03.2023 passed by the first respondent; d) The petitioner, however, did not pa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r would submit that the second respondent (Appellate Authority) ought to have taken note of the said fact and allowed the waiver of pre-deposit application filed by the petitioner. The case on hand falls under different footing. In the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, referred to supra, it was a case, where the petitioners were poor daily wage earners, who were unable to make a challenge to the seizure and confiscation on account of the penalty imposed on them. In the case on hand, the petitioner is a regular importer and he is the Managing Director of the Company and therefore, it can be inferred that he should be familiar with the statutory provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 relating to the mandatory requir....