9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sentative of the Department ORDER This appeal seeks quashing of the order dated May 29, 2016 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). [The Commissioner (Appeals)] The Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal solely for the reason that the statutory requirement of making the pre-deposit, as contemplated under section 129(E) of the Customs Act, 1962, was not complied with. 2. Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al was dismissed without giving any opportunity to the Appellant to either explain the position or to make the deposit. 3. Shri Rakesh Kumar, the learned Authorized Representative of the Department stated that there is no error in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), as the Appellant had not complied with the statutory requirement. 4. The submissions advanced by the learned Counsel ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made the following statements. Whether the duty or penalty or both deposited, if not whether any application for dispensing with such deposit has been made. : The entire duty of 46,72,631/- alongwith interest stands deposited which is appropriated vide the impugned orderin- original. Out of total penalty an amount of Rs. 11,68,500/- (being 25% of penalty) imposed under section 114A is also dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner (Appeals) is not satisfied with the submissions of the Appellant regarding pre-deposit, some reasonable time should be granted to the Appellant to make the pre-deposit. If it is held that pre-deposit has been made or the appellant makes the pre-deposit within the time granted by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the appeal has to be heard, then the Commissioner (Appeals) shall hear the appeal an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
