9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (6) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsel, Shri K. Chatterjee appearing for the appellant, contended before me that the dismissal of the appeal by the Collector without granting a personal hearing to the appellant, is not in accordance with the principles of natural justice. Even otherwise, he contended that the dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the pre-deposit is not made, is also not correct. In this connection, he relied on the following decision reported in 1989 (43) E.L.T. 605 in the case of Ashoka Rubber Products v. Collector of Central Excise. It was held in that decision that pre-deposit is not a condition precedent for filing of appeal. Appeal, once filed, is disposable only on merits. Their Lordships were dealing with Section 35F of the Central Excises and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ucing three additional documents which are as follows : (all are xerox copies) (i) A certificate issued by the Manager of United Bank of India; (ii) 6-Year National Savings Certificate of Rs. 5,000.00 issued by the Postal Department; (iii) Another 6-Year National Savings Certificate issued by the same Department. The abovesaid documents are also material for the purpose of deciding this case. In such circumstances, it was his contention that even if the appeal is going to be remanded it may be remanded to the original authority who alone will be in a position to consider the request of the appellant for cross-examination of the witnesses and he can also look into the documents which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of both sides. In view of the decisions relied on by the learned Consultant, Shri Chatterjee I find that the documents said to be produced, are material ones which are required for a just adjudication of the case. The Miscellaneous Application is accordingly allowed and the documents are allowed to be produced. As far as the merits of the case are concerned, it is seen that the learned Collector (Appeals) decided the matter by dismissing the appeal only on the ground that the appellant had not deposited a sum of Rs. 3,000.00 towards the penalty as ordered by him. In the first instance, the appellant was not heard before passing an order to deposit the sum of Rs. 3,000.00. But in this appeal I have considered the matter and the pre-deposit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered. He should also consider the further documents which the appellant may produce before him, which are three documents produced before this Tribunal along with this Miscellaneous Application No. 124/92. He should grant a personal hearing to the appellant and record the arguments of the appellant and the matter should be disposed of by passing a speaking order and observing the principles of natural justice. However, Shri Chatterjee had contended that even if the penalty is not deposited the appeal has got to be disposed of and the stay is only with respect to the recovery of the penalty. He had relied on certain decisions mentioned above to justify this argument. 6. But in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Vijay P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al in respect of an appeal against the duty demanded or penalty levied. Although the Section does not expressly provide for rejection of the appeal for non-deposit of duty or penalty, yet it makes it obligatory on the appellant to deposit the duty or penalty, pending the appeal, failing which the Appellate Tribunal is fully competent to reject the appeal. See, in this connection, the observations of this Court in respect of Section 129 prior to substitution of Chapter XV by the Finance Act, 1980 in Navin Chandra Chhotelal v. Central Board of Excise & Customs & Ors. (1971-3-SCR-357). The proviso, however, gives power to the Appellate Authority to dispense with such deposit unconditionally or subject to such conditions in cases of undue hards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
