SH. VINAY KUMAR & OTHERS Vs. CCE, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ld. Advocate Sh. Deepak Mahajan representing the applicants in Application Nos. E/Misc./540 -542/(NB(S) prays for further time for deposit on the ground that he is yet to receive response from his clients on the matter. In other words, ld. Counsel has no instructions from his clients inspite of the fact that he had duly intimated the order of the Bench to them.

(2.) As per Misc. Order dated 5.1.2001, the applicants had been directed to deposit 50% of the respective amounts of penalty and furnish proof of such deposit, as a pre -condition for hearing on the Misc. applications. That order was passed under Rule 41 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules. The time for deposit was further extended by the Bench as per subsequent order dated 29.1.2001. That time has also run out. It was categorically mentioned in the order dated 29.1.2001 that the Misc. applications would stand dismissed in the event of the applicants' failure to deposit the amounts. That event has come today and hence the applications stand dismissed. Even otherwise, the applications are liable to be rejected on the ground that the applicants are apparently not interested in prosecuting the matter any further as evidenced by their conduct of not instructing Counsel.

(3.) Reverting to the three appeals, I find that the order passed by the Bench on 16.10.2000 [vide Stay Order No. S/730 -736/2000/NB(SM)] directing the appellants to deposit, on or before 4.12.2000, 50% of the amounts of penalty respectively imposed on them by the Commissioner has not yet been complied with by the parties inspite of notice. The appeals, therefore, cannot be maintained under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the same are rejected for non -compliance with the provisions of Section 35F.