GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 411 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (9) TMI 411 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Unconditional release of the attached properties – restoration of appeals – pre-deposit for hearing of appeal - Held that: - the appeal in respect of which amount of pre-deposit has been deposited by the appellant, the restoration has been granted. - For the Order dated 11.8.2014 passed by the Hon’ble High Court in a challenge to the said common order dated 23.7.2013 against the same applicants, inclination shown towards restoration of those remaining .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ill final disposal of the appeals. - In respect of the remaining applications for restoration of appeals, where the applicants have only shown their willingness to make the payment, but have not yet deposited the amounts directed vide earlier Order dated 3.1.2007, appeals are not restored. Liberty granted to them to apply for restoration only after making payment of the amount directed to be deposited under Order dated 3.1.2007.These remaining applications concerning Appeal nos. C/784/06, C/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

J. Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri V.S. Nankani, Sr. Advocate with Shri J.H. Motwani, Advocate for appellant Shri M.K. Sarangi, Jt. Commr (AR) for respondent ORDER These applications relate to three Orders-in-Original dated 31.3.2006, 29.3.2006 and 3.4.2006 all arising out of a common investigations. Against these three Orders, three sets of appeals were preferred by the five common noticees namely Quality Apparels Exports Pvt Ltd, Mr. C.D.N. Singh, Mr. Aditya Singh, Mr. Randhir Singh and Mrs. P .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y Apparels Exports Pvt. Ltd C/784/06 Order in Original No.CC (MKG) /06 /2006 ADJ ACC dated 31.03.2006 Order No. S/43-48 /WZB/2007/CSTB / CI dated 03.01.2007 1,00,00,000/- Mr. C.D.N. Singh C/788/06 20,00,000/- Mr. Aditya Singh C/786/06 20,00,000/- Mr. Randhir Singh C/789/06 20,00,000/- Mrs. Parimala Singh C/787/06 20,00,000/- Total 1,80,00,000/- II Quality Apparels Exports Pvt. Ltd C/777/06 Order in Original No.CC (MKG) /05 /2006 ADJ ACC dated 29.03.2006 Order No. S/36-42/ WZB/2007/CSTB/CI dated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6 1,00,000/- Total 9,00,000/- 2. For non-payment of the pre-deposit so directed, the appeals were dismissed by the Tribunal vide three Order all dated 10.5.2007. Thereafter, the Customs Authorities vide an Order dated 9.7.2010 passed in F. No. S/3-Misc-02, 03 & 04 /2006 RC/ACC attached certain movable and immovable properties owned by the applicant Mrs. Parimala Singh or her proprietorship firm M/s Quality Exporters. 2.1 Without making or even agreeing to make any pre-deposit and after six y .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der SAFEMA, pursuant to SCN dated 19.12.2000 issued under SAFEMA proposing forfeiture of the same. 2.3 The Applicants filed Customs Appeal no. 55 of 2013 before the Hon ble Bombay High Court impugning the common Order dated 23.7.2013 passed by the Tribunal rejecting the applications for restoration of appeals against Order-in-Original no. CC (MKG) 05/2006 ADJ ACC dated 29.3.2006. 2.4 The Hon ble Bombay High Court vide an Order dated 11.8.2014 permitted restoration of their appeals. It is submitt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.3.2006 in respect of the five noticees along with the cost of ₹ 50,000/-. Consequently, these appeals relating to the said Order-in-Original dated 29.3.2006 are already restored. 2.5 Thereafter, further applications for restoration of appeals against the remaining two Orders-in-Original dated 31.3.2006 and 3.4.2006 were filed by the applicants before the Tribunal showing their willingness to make pre-deposit as earlier directed by the Tribunal vide Order dated 3.1.2007. 2.6 Subsequently, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssued by the Tribunal is produced within 10 days. The applicants requested to await the hearing before the Tribunal. 2.7 Under cover of a letter dated 22.2.2016, Mrs. Parimala Singh deposited ₹ 20,00,000/- vide Pay Order no. 699514 dated 22.2.2016 drawn on HDFC Bank towards pre-deposit directed vide Order dated 3.1.2007 in respect of her Appeal no. C/787/2006 against the remaining Order-in-Original dated 31.3.2006. Thus, she had deposited the amount directed vide all three orders passed on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ties owned by her and her proprietorship firm considering deposit of the amounts earlier directed vide Order dated 3.1.2007. 3. The learned Departmental Representative opposed the applications filed by the applicants and submitted that allowing these applications may amount to putting a premium on the negligence and carelessness of the appellants. He submitted that the applicants have not challenged the earlier common order dated 23.7.2013 of the Tribunal dismissing the application for restorati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nal. In such situation no leniency is warranted in the case. He opposed the application for permitting lifting of attachment of the properties belonging to the applicant Mrs. Parimala Singh even if she is willing to make pre-deposit for the company. 4. We have carefully considered the records before us, the peculiar facts of the case and the submissions advanced by both the sides. 4.1 It is seen that earlier vide a common Order dated 23.7.2013, the Tribunal has dismissed the three sets of applic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le directing as follows- 4. Event-though Mr. Mishra submits that, this course, if permitted, would put a premium on the negligence and carelessness of the Appellants and parties like the Appellants and they would take the court proceedings very lightly, and we see merits in this argument of Shri Mishra as well. However, purely on facts of this case and without creating any precedent for any future case, in the event the Appellants comply with the order passed on 3rd January 2007 within six weeks .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d in the peculiar facts of the case was pleased to direct restoration of appeals against the Order-in-Original dated 29.3.2006 but directed compliance of the Order dated 3.1.2007 passed by the Tribunal and payment of cost of ₹ 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) within six weeks. The said Order dated 11.8.2014 has been accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, upon making the payments as directed by the Hon ble High Court in compliance with the Order dated 3.1.2007 and cost of ₹ 50,000/- .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t of all the appeals of which restoration was denied vide common order dated 23.7.2013. However, in the interest of justice the applicants can be given an opportunity to defend their appeal on merits particularly in view of the Order dated 11.8.2014 passed by the Hon ble Bombay High Court, as the applicants shall not suffer for the negligence of their advocate. 4.5 After filing of above subsequent applications for restoration of her appeals against the remaining two Orders-in-Original dated 31.3 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t qua the Order-in-Original dated 31.3.2006, but the same is yet to be paid. 4.6 It is seen that even where the pre-deposit amount earlier directed is now paid by the applicants, the same has been deposited after a mammoth delay, which cannot be ignored. 4.7 However, considering the Order dated 11.8.2014 passed by the Hon ble High Court in a challenge to the said common order dated 23.7.2013 against the same applicants, we are inclined to restore those remaining appeals for hearing them on merit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version