TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dismissed on the ground that the appellant did not fulfill such predeposit requirement. It was expected in law of the appellate authority to first decide such an application even if the application was rejected by the appellate authority refusing to waive predeposit requirement or same was waived on some condition, the appellate authority had to give reasonable time to the appellant to either make full predeposit or to fulfill the condition that may have been imposed in such order. In any case, dismissal of the appeal for want of predeposit without disposing of the petitioner’s application for waiver thereof was simply not permissible. - Impugned order stands quashed - Decided in favour of appellants. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7188 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion) Act, 1992, no such appeal shall be entertained unless the amount of penalty or redemption charges has been deposited by the Appellant. 2. Learned counsel Shri Puj for the petitioner submitted that section 15 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 though required making of predeposit of penalty, it also authorises the appellate authority to waive such requirement in appropriate case. The petitioner had moved a separate application for stay/waiver of predeposit of penalty. Such application was never decided, instead, the appeal itself came to be dismissed for want of satisfying the predeposit requirement. 3. We notice that section 15 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 pertains to appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation even if the application was rejected by the appellate authority refusing to waive predeposit requirement or same was waived on some condition, the appellate authority had to give reasonable time to the appellant to either make full predeposit or to fulfill the condition that may have been imposed in such order. In any case, dismissal of the appeal for want of predeposit without disposing of the petitioner s application for waiver thereof was simply not permissible. 6. Under the circumstances impugned order dated 6.1.2014 is quashed. The appellate authority shall first decide the application of the petitioner for waiver of predeposit and proceed thereafter, in accordance with law bearing in mind the observations made above. 7. Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
