2011 (3) TMI 197 - AT - Customs

Pre-deposit - The applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalties decided on 10.2.2006 directing the appellants to make pre-deposit of 3 crores by the importing firm and Rs.5 lakhs each by the partners of the firm and Rs.1 lakh each by other appellants - As the appellants have failed to make pre-deposit during the time fixed for compliance the notice was issued vide order dated 29.10.2010 granting opportunity to the appellants to satisfy as to why the appeals should not be dismissed for failure on the part of the appellants to comply with the requirement of pre-deposit - In the present case there is no change of event after passing of order on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalties nor any the appellants produced any fresh materials - In the circumstances as the appellants have not complied with the conditions of stay order the appeals are dismissed for non compliance of the provisions of Section 129E of the Customs Act 1962

Summary

Issues:
Non-compliance with pre-deposit requirement leading to dismissal of appeals.

Analysis:
The appellants failed to comply with the pre-deposit requirement, prompting the Tribunal to issue a notice questioning why the appeals should not be dismissed. The appellants argued that their contentions were not considered properly, citing a decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court. The appeals and applications for waiver of pre-deposit were filed in 2005, with a subsequent order directing specific amounts to be deposited by the appellants. Despite legal proceedings and remands, the appellants did not adhere to the conditions of the stay order, resulting in the dismissal of appeals in 2007. After various legal steps, fresh hearings were conducted, and new deposit amounts were specified. However, the appellants failed to comply within the set time frame, leading to a notice for non-compliance and potential dismissal of appeals.

The appellants, during the proceedings, reiterated arguments already considered in previous orders. The appellants relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, emphasizing the Tribunal's discretion in extending the pre-deposit period or reconsidering waiver based on subsequent events or new evidence. However, in the present case, no new developments or evidence were presented post the order on the waiver of pre-deposit. As a result, due to the appellants' failure to meet the stay order conditions, the appeals were dismissed for non-compliance with the Customs Act, 1962.