TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 811X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustification to accede to the prayer made by the appellant. The CESTAT has found that while various deposits appear to have been made during the course of investigation, those amounts cannot be considered for the purposes of computing the pre-deposit amount since those deposits had been effected by different entities and individuals. Undisputedly, the depositors were not the appellants before the CESTAT. It was in view of the aforesaid that it came to conclude that amounts deposited by other entities cannot be reckoned towards pre-deposit. It has further observed that even if the entities which had made those deposits had chosen not to initiate any appeals, it would still be open for them to seek refund of those amounts. In light of the una ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir No Objection Certificates, the same are liable to be factored in for the purposes of the pre-deposit mandated in terms of Section 129E of the 1962 Act. 3. The CESTAT has in terms of the order impugned while taking note of the statutory position held that it is only in situations where the person or the entity seeking waiver/adjustment for the purposes of pre-deposit has itself tendered those amounts during the course of investigation, the issue of adjustment would not arise. It has further and in light of the express language of Section 129E of the 1962 Act found no justification to accede to the prayer made by the appellant and has assigned the following reasons in support of that conclusion:- 5. It is evident from the above section tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interfere with the view expressed by the CESTAT in the order under appeal. As is manifest from a reading of Section 129E, the liability to comply with the conditional pre-deposit is placed upon the person desirous of appealing . The provision further stipulates that it is the said person who shall ..pending the appeal deposit the duty and interest demanded or the penalty levied . 5. The CESTAT has found that while various deposits appear to have been made during the course of investigation, those amounts cannot be considered for the purposes of computing the pre-deposit amount since those deposits had been effected by different entities and individuals. Undisputedly, the depositors were not the appellants before the CESTAT. It was in view o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
