P.K. Jain, J. - (1.) By the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 14-9-2001 passed by respondent No. 1 as contained in Annexure-1. A further prayer has been made to issue a suitable direction commanding the respondent No. 1 to hear and decide the Appeal No. E/1274/2001 on merit in accordance with law without insisting on pre-deposit.
(2.) Shri Bharatji Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri S.P. Kesharwani, learned standing Counsel appearing for the respondent have been heard.
(3.) Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner filed an appeal before the Tribunal in which he had specifically pleaded that his financial condition was very bad and he was not in a position to deposit the amount of excise duty levied. He has filed the balance sheet before the Tribunal but the Tribunal without considering the financial stringency passed the impugned order directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 8 lacs. Shri S.P. Kesharwani, learned standing Counsel has submitted that financial stringency was not argued before the Tribunal as it appears from the impugned order. It is also argued that out of the amount of Rs. 50 lacs only 8 lac was directed to be deposited.;