Shri Soumen Chowdhury vs Commissioner Of Customs(Prev.), ...
- CitationAppeal No.CA-70966/13
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appeal is dismissed for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement of section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962, where the appellant has not complied with the stay order directing deposit of the stipulated amount within the time fixed and has not shown compliance by the date of hearing.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.17/CUS/CC(P)/WB/2013 dated 30.4.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs(Prev.), West Bengal, Kolkata.)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE
HONBLE DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL) HONBLE DR. I.P. LAL, MEMBER(TECHNICAL)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT(Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any Authorative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Authorities?
Shri Soumen Chowdhury Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.
Commissioner of Customs(Prev.), Kolkata Respondent (s)
Appearance:
Miss Debi Parbat, Adv. for the Appellant (s)
Shri S.N.Mitra, AC(AR) for the Respondent (s)
CORAM:
Honble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial) Honble Dr. I.P. Lal, Member(Technical)
Date of Hearing:- 20.7.2015 Date of Pronouncement :- 20.7.2015
ORDER NO.FO/A/75382/2015
Per Dr. D.M. Misra.
1. Heard both sides.
2. Vide Stay Order No.SO/75426/2015 dated 12.5.2015, the Applicant was directed to deposit Rs.5.00 Lakhs within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 20.7.2015 i.e. today.
3. Miss Debi Parbat, ld.Adv. appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant has not informed about compliance of the said Order.
4. The ld.AR for the Revenue submitted that as the applicant had not complied with the provisions of section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962, the appeal may be dismissed.
5. In view of the reason stated by the ld.AR for the Revenue the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962. Appeal dismissed.
(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.)
SD/ SD/
(I.P.LAL) (D.M.MISRA) MEMBER(TECHNICAL) MEMBER(JUDICIAL) sm
2 Appeal No. CA-70966/13
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