Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2014 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 1267 - CESTAT MUMBAIMaintainability of appeal - non-compliance under the provisions of Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 - penalty on appellant-CHA on account that he helped exporter to avail excess drawback claim u/s 114 of CA - learned Commissioner (Appeals) without appreciating the facts and without commenting as to why pre-deposit is required in such a situation, directed the appellant to pre-deposit 50% of the penalty imposed on them - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- Relying, on the case law in the case of VAMAN KUNDER VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (ADJ.), MUMBAI [2008 (9) TMI 324 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], it is held that the appeal against the impugned order is maintainable before this Tribunal. Therefore, the preliminary objection raised by the learned AR is turned down. The learned Commissioner (Appeals)’s order directing the appellant to pre-deposit 50% of the penalty, has not been passed on merits therefore, the order is not correct. Consequently, the final order dismissing the appeal is also not correct, hence set aside - the matter is remanded back to the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to pass an appropriate order on merits, first on their stay application, thereafter on appeal. Appeal disposed off.
|