9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (4) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tral Excise, Coimbatore (third respondent) passed an order on 21-11-1989 holding that the petitioner had wrongly utilised the Notification No. 208/83 and after notice to the petitioner, he held that a sum of Rs. 2,99,502.94 is payable by him as duty and he also levied a penalty of Rs. 10,000/-. Against the said order, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the second respondent-Tribunal and by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ petition is not properly framed, I am not inclined to dismiss the same on technical grounds. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner could not pay the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- as ordered by the Tribunal on or before 31-12-1990. The question now is, whether any relief can be given to the petitioner in respect of the payment of the pre-deposit as per the order of the Tribunal dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pees fifty thousand only) on or before 31-7-1991, the appeal before the Tribunal shall stand restored and the Tribunal will dispose of the appeal on merits. Depending upon the deposit of the said sum on or before 31-7-1991, the proceedings of the 4th respondent-Superintendent of Central Excise dated 14-3-1991, shall stand stayed. If no deposit is made on or before 31-7-1991, it is open to the resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
