2000 (5) TMI 149

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. Commissioner (Appeals) has held that since the appellants had not pre-deposited the entire amount of duty demanded, therefore the appeal has been dismissed under Section 129E of the Customs Act. 2. Heard Shri B. Satish Sundar, ld. Advocate who submits that the matter concerns the denial of request for extension of bonded period with regard to the various types of liquors imported by the appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ere is no need to order any pre-deposit as Revenue is safeguarded. He also submits that on merits he has, prima facie, a very strong case which has not been considered at all by the lower appellate authority. 3. Heard ld. D.R. who submits that the bond period having expired, notice to demand duty under Section 72 was the right of Revenue and therefore the demand confirmed is legally correct and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeal itself is legally not correct. The Hon'ble High Court has quashed the Board's Circular No. 459/16/99 dated 30-3-99 which had directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to adjudicate on pre deposits without giving personal hearing. In view of the above judgement of Hon'ble High Court, I find that the lower appellate authority has not ensured observence of principles of natural justice in the matter....