TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1400X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 24th June, 2014. That is prior to 6th August, 2014, on which date section 129-E as quoted above, as amended, came into force - Held that: - reliance placed in the case of M/s. Ganesh Yadav Versus Union of India And 3 Others [2015 (7) TMI 304 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT], where it was held that by virtue of the opening words of Section 35F(1) of the Act as well as by the second proviso to the provision, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal by taking recourse to section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962. Section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962 reads as under:- 129-E Deposit of certain percentage of duty demanded or penalty imposed before filing appeal . - The Tribunal or the Commissioner (Appeals), as the case may be, shall not entertain any appeal, - (i) under sub-section (1) of section 128, unless the appellant has dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection shall not exceed rupees ten crores: Provided further that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the stay applications and appeals pending before any appellate authority prior to the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014. 2. The tribunal found that the order-in-original is dated 24th June, 2014. However, the right of appeal and guaranteed to the appellant is by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith this condition, namely, to deposit a sum of 7.5% of the penalty amount. That was a pre-condition for hearing of the appeal. That was not complied with till 18th November, 2014. It is in these circumstances that the tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal without adjudication. 3. The only argument canvased before us is that the tribunal could not have taken recourse to the second provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eed with its conclusion. 4. In these circumstances, we do not think that the similar argument, which was specifically considered and negatived by a Division Bench of this court can be raised again. We are of the opinion that the tribunal was right in applying the amended provision and as quoted above. There is no legal infirmity or perversity in the order impugned before us. Consequently, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
