TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 625X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pre-deposit on 15-9-2014, we are of the view that the application was required to be considered and disposed in accordance with law. The order states that the application was not on record. If the Office of the Tribunal did not place it on record, the Appellant cannot be faulted with. - order in its present form with regard to the present Appellant is not sustainable. The order dated 15-9-2014 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that against the assessment made by the Commissioner, the Appeal was preferred in which orders for pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Act were passed for ₹ 10 Lacs by 15-9-2014. Prior to the same, the Appellant had filed an application on 22-8-2014 for rectification/mod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such ground is urged. If the order dated 11-7-2014 was passed after considering all grounds urged by the Appellant with regard to pre-deposit, the occasion for filing an application for rectification/modification does not arise as it virtually seeks review of the order for which there is no statutory provision. He has also relied upon an order passed in Tax Case No. 48 of 2014. 5. We have cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the Tribunal to dispose of the Appellant s application for rectification/modification dated 22-8-2014 at the earliest. 9. The Appellant shall place a copy of this order before the Tribunal within a maximum period of three weeks from today, failing which, the Tribunal shall be under no obligation to hear the application for rectification/modification and the Appeal shall stand dismissed. 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
