KUSUM ALLOYS LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE misc. applications filed by the Revenue and the party are taken up together for disposal. The Tribunal, Chennai Bench, had remanded the matter by Final Order Nos. 619 to 623/1999 dated 24 -3 -1999 for de novo consideration. While setting aside the OIO and directing the matter to be re -adjudicated, there was also a direction to the appellant to pre -deposit Rs. 50 lakhs within a period of four months from the receipt of that order. The appellants have not deposited these amounts and the Commissioner also has not re -adjudicated the matter till date i.e. almost more than 9 years.

(2.) THE Revenues application prays for dismissing the appeals which were before the Tribunal in C/448 to 452/1998 for non -compliance of the remand order in depositing the amounts.

(3.) THE misc. application filed by the appellants contend that now it is a settled law that while remanding the matter by setting aside the impugned order, the Tribunal cannot give directions for pre -deposit. He refers to the Delhi High Court judgment in P.R. Industries v. UOI - 2007 (207) E.L.T. 349 (Del.) and the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment rendered in Royal Industries Ltd. v. UOI - 2006 (204) E.L.T. 564 (P and H) = 2006 (4) S.T.R. 425 (P and H).