TINA SALES AGENCY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Perused petition. Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. Jetly waives service on behalf of respondents. By consent of parties, petition is taken up for final hearing.

(2.) We were taken through the impugned order passed by the CESTAT, Bench at Mumbai dated 7th September, 2009 [2010 (252) E.L.T. 388 (Tri.-Mumbai)]. The opening part of paragraph No. 2 of the impugned order refers to the grant of stay of recovery of fine. At the same time, in the last portion of the said paragraph, it is mentioned that the "appellant shall pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- towards penalty under Section 129E of the Act." In our considered view, the impugned order is contrary order. On one hand stay is granted and on the other hand pre- deposit is ordered. In this view of the matter, the impugned order cannot sustain. Hence, the same is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal.

(3.) The Tribunal is directed to treat the appeal as expedited one and dispose of the same without being influenced by this order in accordance with law.