TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dismissed - decided against appellant. - ST/20093/2017-SM, ST/20344/2017-SM, ST/20345/2017 & ST/20346/2017-SM - 20926-20929/2017 - Dated:- 9-5-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member Shri C.A. Jojo, Advocate For the Appellant Smt Kavita, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per: S. S. Garg In this case the Registry has raised the objection that the appellants h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals are not maintainable without mandatory pre-deposit as provided under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. He further submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has also rejected the appeal of the appellant for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act 1944. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. It is a fact that the appellants have fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and a half per cent of the duty, in case where duty or duty and penalty are in dispute, or penalty where such penalty is in dispute, in pursuance of the decision or order appealed against. 4.1. Further the Commissioner (Appeals) has also considered the statutory provisions as provided in Section 35F and Section 83 of the Finance Act 1994 and has also relied upon some decisions of the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be, for preferring appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Tribunal. Here the appeals have been filed after the amendment and are liable for rejection on account of non compliance of provisions of Section 35F as discussed above. 5. After perusal of the impugned order and the statutory provisions, I am of the view that the present appeals are not maintainable without the mandatory pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
