TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 415X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to deposit the 1/4th of the amount of duty within period of 3 weeks was also not complied with and even the benefit extended by the Supreme Court while dismissing the SLP and directing to deposit 1/4th of the duty within 4 weeks has not been availed by the petitioner within the time fixed by the Supreme Court. As the matter about predeposit had travelled upto the Supreme Court and even the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the demand of Central Excise Duty and penalty the petitioner had filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) Custom and Central Excise at Bhopal. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 22.04.1999 passed an interim order under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act in the said appeal directing the petitioner/appellant to deposit the duty within 2 weeks. The said order was not complied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by the Supreme Court. In the meanwhile, the petitioner's appeal was dismissed for noncompliance of the directions issued by it as also by the High Court vide order passed on 13.06.1999. The said order of dismissal of appeal for want of deposit was challenged by the petitioner before the CESTAT, New Delhi. The CESTAT, New Delhi dismissed the appeal on 07.12.1999 on the ground that the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and even the benefit extended by the Supreme Court while dismissing the SLP has not been availed by the petitioner within the time fixed by the Supreme Court. In the circumstances, in our considered view, when the matter about predeposit had travelled upto the Supreme Court and even the order of Supreme Court has not been complied with by the petitioner, it was not open for the Commissioner (Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
