CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2003) 06 BOM CK 0117

Mahavir Medical Research Centre vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Bombay High Court · Decided on 16 June 2003 · Citation: (2004) 112 ECR 242

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.C. Daga, J · J.P. Devadhra, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 1150 of 2003

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 347 words
1.

Heard Learned Counsel for the rival parties

2.

Perused petition and reply.

3.

This petition is directed against the order dated 15.11.2002 passed by the CEGAT (Tribunal, directing pre-deposit in the sum of Rs. 33,530 by 30.11.2002. Subject to pre-deposit being made, penalty was ordered to be waived by the Tribunal during pendency of the appeal.

4.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners, before CEGAT while seeking exemption from predeposit, had specifically placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of 2000 (122) ELT 626 , in which Tribunal had dispensed with necessity of predeposit as required u/s 129-E of the Customs Act in view of the fact that the imported goods were in control of Customs Department. The Tribunal in the instant case rejected the prayer to dispense with pre-deposit, made by the petitioners without dealing with the contention raised by the petitioner relying upon the decision of the Tribunal delivered in the case of P.D. Hinduja National Hospital (supra).

5.

In our opinion, it was obligatory on the part of CEGAT to ideal with the specific contention raised by the petitioner and the decide the same on merits. If the contention was covered in the earlier judgment of the Tribunal, then it was obligatory on the part of the Tribunal either to follow the said judgment or to distinguish the same. From the impugned order, it is clear that there is absolutely no answer to the contention raised by the petitioner in this behalf except a bald reference to the judgment of P.D. Hinduja National Hospital case (supra).

6.

In the circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and remand the proceedings back to the Tribunal with a direction to re-hear and decide the application u/s 129-E of the Customs Act, as expeditiously as possibly at any rate, within 3 months from the date of receipt of writ from this Court with direction to deal with the specific contention raised by petitioner referred to hereinabove.

7.

Petition stands disposed of in terms of this order with no order as to costs.