Varinder Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Held

The Court held that while Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, makes pre-deposit a mandatory requirement for entertaining an appeal, in this specific instance, the appeal was dismissed solely on this procedural ground. Considering the petitioner's willingness to deposit the pre-deposit amount, the Court decided to grant one more opportunity to comply with the provisions of Section 35F. The impugned orders were set aside, and the Commissioner (Appeals) was directed to decide the petitioner's appeal on merits after the petitioner deposits the required pre-deposit amount. The Court did not decide the merits of the original appeal.

Facts

The petitioner, Varinder Kumar, sought to quash two orders dated 05.12.2022 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Goods and Services Tax. These orders dismissed the petitioner's appeal solely on the grounds of non-deposit of pre-deposit as mandated by Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The petitioner's counsel stated that the petitioner was willing to deposit the required pre-deposit amount. The Court noted that while Section 35F mandates pre-deposit for an appeal to be entertained, the appeal was rejected only on this procedural ground.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the petitioner could be dismissed solely on the ground of non-deposit of pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, when the petitioner expressed willingness to deposit the amount? The petitioner argued that since the appeal was dismissed only on the procedural ground of non-deposit of pre-deposit, and the petitioner was willing to comply, an opportunity should be granted to deposit the amount. The revenue or State did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.