Allahabad High Court
M/S SHIPSTER IMPEX AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The appeal may be filed, numbered and registered without insisting on the pre‑deposit, and may be treated as a defective proceeding until the deposit is made.
Summary
The petitioners, M/s Shipster Impex and another, filed a writ petition challenging the requirement to make a pre‑deposit of 7.5% of the disputed customs duty/penalty before filing an appeal against an Order‑in‑Original dated 28‑Nov‑2025. They sought a direction that the appeal be allowed to be filed, numbered and registered without the pre‑deposit, and that the waiver application pending before the Commissioner (Appeals) be decided. The Court noted a prior decision in M/s Runway Impex & Anr. v. Union of India (2026 AHC 95732‑DB) which held that such appeals may be filed without pre‑deposit and can be treated as defective proceedings until the deposit is made. Relying on that precedent, the Court directed that the present petition be disposed of on the same terms, allowing the appeal to be filed and registered without insisting on the pre‑deposit at this stage. The decision thus clarifies the procedural requirement under the Customs Act for filing appeals in customs matters.
Issues considered
- Whether a pre‑deposit of 7.5% of the disputed customs duty/penalty is mandatory for filing an appeal against an Order‑in‑Original under the Customs Act, 1962.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Customs duty
- Pre‑deposit
- Appeal procedure
- Writ petition
- High Court
- Customs Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT TAX No. - 2428 of 2026
M/S Shipster Impex And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akanksha Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Dhananjay Awasthi
Court No. - 3
HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.
1. Heard Ms. Akanksha Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri
Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the revenue.
2. Present writ petition raises a common legal issue. Visited with
Adjudication Order (Order-in-Original), passed under the provisions of
the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the petitioner
intend to file appeal, thereagainst. He also seeks direction upon
respondent no. 2 to decide the petitioner's waiver application filed
alongwith his appeal (Mr. Usman, Proprietor of M/s Shipster Impex Vs.
Joint Commissioner, Customs Commissionerate, Noida) pending before
respondent no.2 against the Order-in-Original No. 51/JC/NOIDA-
CUS/2025-26 dated 28.11.2025.
3. In identical facts, M/s Runway Impex & Anr. Vs. Union of India & 2
Ors.; 2026:AHC:95732-DB has been disposed of vide order dated
28.04.2026 on the following terms:
"23. Accordingly, the writ petitions stand disposed of with the direction
that the proceeding being presented by the petitioner before the
Commissioner (Appeals), against the Order-in-Original dated
28.11.2025, must be allowed to be filed, numbered and thus registered,
without insisting on pre-deposit at the rate of 7.5% of the disputed
demand of customs duty/penalty, at that stage. Such proceeding may be
registered as a defective proceeding-for reason of pre-deposit not made
WTAX No. 2428 of 2026
2
or proof of pre-deposit not produced, at that stage. The issue, whether
that appeal is to be ‘entertained’, may be considered by the
Commissioner (Appeals), on the quasi-judicial side, where that
proceeding is listed/placed before it, first."
4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is also disposed of on the same
terms.
(Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)
May 6, 2026
Shiv
Digitally signed by :-
SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…