{"id":318394,"date":"2024-03-26T12:00:49","date_gmt":"2024-03-26T06:30:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=318394"},"modified":"2024-04-03T13:20:48","modified_gmt":"2024-04-03T07:50:48","slug":"tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"[Section 129-E, Customs Act] | Tribunal has discretion to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> The Division Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva and Ravinder Dudeja*<\/span>, JJ., opined that if the statute gave a right to appeal upon certain conditions, it was upon fulfillment of those conditions that the right became vested and exercisable to appellant. The proviso to Section 129-E<\/a> of the Customs Act, 1962<\/a> (‘the Act’) gave a discretion to the Tribunal in cases of undue hardships to dispense the obligation to deposit the duty\/interest or penalty. The Court thus dismissed the present appeals filed under Section 130<\/a> of the Act<\/a> and held that there was no error in the orders passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (‘CESTAT’), thereby, dismissing the appeal for non-compliance of the deposit order dated 17-6-2009, as per the provisions of Section 129 read with proviso of Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

Appellants, G & S International and Raj International, were engaged in exports, which were made under Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (‘DEPB’) and Drawback Scheme. Based on the information that appellants were engaged in fraudulent exports of Shawls and Readymade garments to Commonwealth of Independent States countries (CIS) via UAE, investigation was conducted by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence. On conclusion of investigation, Show Cause Notices (‘SCNs’) were issued to appellants. Thereafter, SCNs were adjudicated vide Order-in-Original (‘OIO’) dated 30-9-2008, holding that the Drawback amounting to Rs 67,56,033 in the matter of G & S International and Drawback amounting to Rs 1,00,05,250 in the matter of Raj International, were inadmissible to them and the same should be recovered from them along with interest at 18% p.a. under Section 75(2) of the Act read with Rules 16 and 16-A of the Customs and Central Excise Duty Drawback Rules, 1995.<\/p>\n

Being aggrieved with the OIO dated 30-9-2008, appellants preferred an appeal along with application for waiver of pre-deposit under Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a> and stay of operation of the impugned order dated 30-9-2008 before the CESTAT. The CESTAT vide order dated 17-6-2009 dismissed the stay applications, directing G.S. International to deposit Rs 67,56,033 and Raj International to deposit an amount of Rs 1,00,05,250. The CESTAT vide Final Order dated 10-8-2009, recorded non-compliance of its order dated 17-6-2009 and dismissed the appeals that were filed by appellants before the High Court. Appellants challenged the final order of CESTAT and filed the present appeals under Section 130<\/a> of the Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/p>\n

The issue for consideration was “whether the CESTAT Tribunal erred in law in dismissing the appeal for non-compliance of the deposit order dated 17-6-2009 in view of the provisions of Section 129(2-A) read with proviso to Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a>?”<\/span>.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a> as it stood prior to its Amendment by Finance Act, 2014<\/a>, conferred a discretion on the Commissioner (Appeals) and CESTAT to dispense with the deposit liable to be made for the purposes of an assessee pursuing an appeal where it was found that the deposit of duty, interest or penalty levied would cause hardship.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a> did not expressly provide for the rejection of appeal for non-compliance with the requirements regarding the deposit of penalty or duty but the provision made it obligatory on appellants to deposit the duty or penalty pending the appeal and if a party did not comply either with the main Section or with any order that might be passed under the proviso, the Appellate Authority was fully competent to reject the appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 129-E. Unless Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a> was complied with, the Appellate Authority could not proceed to hear the appeal on merits. Therefore, the consequence of failure to comply with Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a> was the rejection of appeal on that ground.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that if the statute gave a right to appeal upon certain conditions, it was upon fulfillment of those conditions that the right became vested and exercisable to appellant. The proviso to Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a> gave a discretion to the Tribunal in cases of undue hardships to dispense the obligation to deposit the duty\/interest or penalty.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that in the present case, the application for waiver of pre-deposit was dismissed by the Tribunal and the petitions challenging the orders passed by the CESTAT had been dismissed by the High Court and appellants did not make compliance of pre-deposit order even thereafter and therefore the CESTAT was constrained to dismiss the appeals.<\/p>\n

The Court thus dismissed the present appeals and held that there was no error in the orders passed by the CESTAT, thereby, dismissing the appeal for non-compliance of the deposit order dated 17-6-2009, as per the provisions of Section 129 read with proviso of Section 129-E<\/a> of the Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[G&S International v. Commr. of Customs, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 1794<\/a>, decided on 14-3-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment authored by: Justice Ravinder Dudeja<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Appellant: Navneet Panwar, Advocate<\/p>\n

For the Respondent: Anish Roy, SSC; Girish Agarwal, Advocate<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Section 129-E of Customs Act, 1962 makes it obligatory to deposit the duty\/penalty pending the appeal and if a party does not comply either with the main Section or with any order that might be passed under the proviso, the Appellate Authority is fully competent to reject the appeal for non-compliance.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[6651,57467,2543,34263,28934,66775,25574,2591,2627,66774,42792,66776],"class_list":["post-318394","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cestat","tag-customs-act-1962","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-deposit","tag-discretion","tag-dispense-obligation","tag-duty","tag-Interest","tag-Penalty","tag-section-129-e","tag-tribunal","tag-undue-hardships"],"yoast_head":"\nTribunal has discretion u\/s 129-E of Customs Act 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi HC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal has discretion under Section 129-E of Customs Act, 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"[Section 129-E, Customs Act] | Tribunal has discretion to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal has discretion under Section 129-E of Customs Act, 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-03-26T06:30:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-04-03T07:50:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"[Section 129-E, Customs Act] | Tribunal has discretion to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Tribunal has discretion u\/s 129-E of Customs Act 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-03-26T06:30:49+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-04-03T07:50:48+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal has discretion under Section 129-E of Customs Act, 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"[Section 129-E, Customs Act] | Tribunal has discretion to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\",\"name\":\"Simranjeet\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Simranjeet\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Tribunal has discretion u\/s 129-E of Customs Act 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi HC | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal has discretion under Section 129-E of Customs Act, 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"[Section 129-E, Customs Act] | Tribunal has discretion to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi High Court","og_description":"Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal has discretion under Section 129-E of Customs Act, 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-03-26T06:30:49+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-04-03T07:50:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Simranjeet","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"[Section 129-E, Customs Act] | Tribunal has discretion to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Simranjeet","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/","name":"Tribunal has discretion u\/s 129-E of Customs Act 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-03-26T06:30:49+00:00","dateModified":"2024-04-03T07:50:48+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd"},"description":"Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal has discretion under Section 129-E of Customs Act, 1962 to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/tribunal-has-discretion-to-dispense-obligation-to-deposit-duty-interest-or-penalty-in-cases-of-undue-hardships-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"[Section 129-E, Customs Act] | Tribunal has discretion to dispense obligation to deposit duty\/interest or penalty in cases of undue hardships: Delhi High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd","name":"Simranjeet","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Simranjeet"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":233758,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/11\/utt-hc-pre-deposit-amount-reduced-considering-hardship-under-s-129-e-of-customs-act-court-modifies-cestat-order\/","url_meta":{"origin":318394,"position":0},"title":"Utt HC | Pre-deposit amount reduced considering hardship under S. 129-E of Customs Act; Court modifies CESTAT order","author":"Editor","date":"August 11, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has put this story together","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":265104,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/06\/to-appeal-or-not-to-appeal-curious-case-of-anti-dumping-duty-not-levied\/","url_meta":{"origin":318394,"position":1},"title":"To Appeal or Not to Appeal? Curious Case of Anti-Dumping Duty not Levied","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 6, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Tarun Jain\u2020 Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 30","rel":"","context":"In "Experts Corner"","block_context":{"text":"Experts Corner","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-148.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-148.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-148.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-148.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-148.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":243734,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/12\/cestat-penalty-imposed-under-s-112-read-with-s-114aa-of-the-customs-act-1962-set-aside-tribunal-allows-appeal-stating-absence-of-mens-rea\/","url_meta":{"origin":318394,"position":2},"title":"CESTAT | Penalty imposed under S. 112 read with S. 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 set aside; Tribunal allows appeal stating absence of mens rea","author":"Editor","date":"February 12, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal which was filed against the impugned order wherein the penalty of Rs 50,000 had been imposed under Section 112 read with Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant was a customs broker and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":233580,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/08\/jhar-hc-mandatory-pre-deposit-not-to-be-waived-off-by-court-under-amended-s-35-f-central-excise-act-until-exceptional-grounds-of-undue-financial-hardships-is-proved-beyond-doubt\/","url_meta":{"origin":318394,"position":3},"title":"Jhar HC | Mandatory pre-deposit not to be waived off by Court under amended S. 35-F, Central Excise Act until exceptional grounds of undue financial hardships is proved beyond doubt","author":"Editor","date":"August 8, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has put this story together","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":261351,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/09\/unless-7-5-of-the-penalty-is-deposited-when-the-penalty-is-in-dispute-the-appeal-cannot-be-entertained-by-the-tribunal\/","url_meta":{"origin":318394,"position":4},"title":"CESTAT | Unless 7.5% of the penalty is deposited when the penalty is in dispute, the appeal cannot be entertained by the Tribunal","author":"Editor","date":"February 9, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of Sulekha Beevi, C.S. (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) decided on an appeal which was filed in the matter of non-compliance with the pre-deposit. It was alleged that M\/s. Sri Vasavi Gold and Bullion Pvt. Ltd. (the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":292204,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/15\/jurisdictional-issues-challenges-before-cestat\/","url_meta":{"origin":318394,"position":5},"title":"Jurisdictional Issues \u2014 Challenges before CESTAT","author":"Editor","date":"May 15, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"by Suvendu Kumar Pati\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"jurisdictional issues","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jurisdictional-issues.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jurisdictional-issues.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jurisdictional-issues.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jurisdictional-issues.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/318394","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=318394"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/318394\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=318394"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=318394"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=318394"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}