9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 923X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... final hearing today. 3. The facts stated briefly are that against a common orderin- original dated 15.09.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Ahmedabad, the petitioner and others, including M/s Bhairavi Exim Pvt. Ltd., preferred appeals before the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"). Along with the appeals, stay applications also came to be filed. All the stay applications came to be disposed of by a common order dated 07.07.2010 whereby, the Tribunal directed the co-appellant - M/s Bhairavi Exim Pvt. Ltd. to deposit 50% of the duty within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order, subject to which the predepo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .02.2015 whereby, the Tribunal observed that the predeposit of penalties on the co-appellants were waived on condition that the main appellant was directed to make predeposit, and that the main appellant having not made predeposit, the appeal was rightly dismissed for non-compliance. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition. 4. Mr. Hasit Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner assailed the impugned order by pointing out that in the order dated 21.06.2010 made on the stay applications filed by the petitioner and other co-appellants, except for the direction to M/s Bhairavi Exim Pvt. Ltd. to make pre-deposit of 50% of duty, qua the other co-appellants, no direction to make pre-deposit had been issued. The attention of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eight weeks. Insofar as the penalties imposed on the other appellants, including the petitioner are concerned, the condition of pre-deposit of penalties had been dispensed with. It appears that the appeals preferred by all the appellants had been dismissed for non-compliance of the stay order in view of the fact that M/s Bhairavi Exim Pvt. Ltd. had not made the pre-deposit of 50% of the duty. However, in case of other co-appellants who had earlier approached the Tribunal, the Tribunal by an order dated 14.02.2011, had restored their appeals by observing that the stay petitions of the applicants had been unconditionally allowed. The petitioner herein is similarly situated to the said applicants in the stay applications and therefore, was ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
