PREM PHARMACEUTICALS Vs. COLLECTOR (APPEALS), CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Upadhyaya, learned Counsel for the petitioner. This is a petition challenging rejection of an application Under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, by the Collector (Appeals), Indore. The said provision requires that every appeal should be accompanied by a deposit of the amount of the demand appealed against. The condition of deposit can be waived by the Appellate Authority. In this case the Appellate Authority refused to waive the condition of deposit. According to Shri Upadhyaya the order is a non -speaking one. He tried to support his contention by citing some rulings. We are not satisfied that the impugned order is not a speaking order, though the order is short it is based on relevant considerations. Moreover, now the appeal also has been decided finally by the Collector (Appeals) and an appealable order has been passed. The petitioner is free to approach the Appellate Authority against the order passed by the Collector (Appeals).

(2.) IT would not be proper for us to entertain this petition when the forum of appeal is open to the petitioner. The petition is, therefore, dismissed without notice to [respondent.]