Shri Anil Navani vs Commissioner Of Customs-Kandla
- CitationAppeal No. : C/11166-11169/2014
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an appellant fails to comply with a stay order directing pre-deposit of penalty, the appeal may be dismissed for non-compliance, where the Tribunal has already rejected an application for modification of that stay order and extended the time for compliance.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[ Arising out of OIO-KDL/COMMR/39/2013-14 dtd 26.11.2013 Passed by Commissioner of CUSTOMS-KANDLA ]
1. Shri Anil Navani
2. Shri Anil Prajapati
3. Shri Diptesh Patel
4. Shri Manish Rajwani - Appellant(s)
Vs
Commissioner of CUSTOMS-KANDLA - Respondent (s)
Represented by :
For Assessee : Shri Anil Navani, Appellant For Revenue : Shri G C Prajapati, Authorised Representative
For approval and signature :
Mr. P.K. Das, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. H.K. Thakur, Honble Member (Technical)
1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes
CORAM :
Mr. P.K. Das, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. H.K. Thakur, Honble Member (Technical)
Date of Hearing / Decision : 20/4/2015
ORDER No. 10656-10659/2015 dated 20.04.2015
Per : Mr.P.K. Das,
By Stay Order No A/15821-15824/2014 dtd 26.11.2014 the applicants were directed to pre-deposit the penalties as under:
a) Shri Anil Navani - Rs 5 lacs
b) Shri Anil Prajapati - Rs 4 lacs
c) Shri Diptesh Patel - Rs 3 lacs
d) Shri Manish Rajwani - Rs 5 lacs
2. The applicants filed applications for Modification of the Stay Order. By order No. M/10481-10484/2015 dtd 4.3.2015 this Tribunal rejected the applications and extended the period of compliance for further 6 weeks. Today Shri Anil Navani, appearing in person and filed an application for Modification of the stay order. None appears on behalf of other applicants. We find that the Tribunal already filed an application by order dtd 4.3.2015 rejected the Modification of stay order. As the applicant failed to comply the stay order, all the appeals dismissed for none compliance of the stay order.
(Dictated and pronounced in the Court)
(H.K. Thakur) (P.K. Das) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)
swami
2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free