IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.17754 of 2006 Date of decision: 30.11.2006 M/s Northern India Steel Rolling Mills. ---Petitioner. Vs. The Commissioner (Appeals) C.E. and Customs. -----Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Amit Jhanji, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. Daya Chaudhary, Assistant Solicitor General of India. ----- ORDER: The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the demand of duty as well as penalty raised by the adjudicating authority.. The said order was a composite order in the cases of 21 persons. In some of the appeals against the said common order, order of penalty was set- aside. The prayer of the petitioner before the Appellate Authority was for waiver of the requirement of pre-deposit, on which, a direction was issued that on petitioner’s depositing the amount of duty only, the appeal shall be heard on merits and the payment of penalty was waived off. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since in connected cases, covered by the order dated 24.06.2006 (Annexure P-6), appeals were heard without requiring the deposit of duty and the penalty order has been set-aside, the petitioner should not be required to deposit the duty as a pre-condition. `C.W.P. No.17754 of 2006 We do not find any merit in this submission. The only issue gone into in the order dated 24.06.2006 (Annexure P-6) was about penalty. Case of the petitioner does not stand on the same footing. Setting aside of the order of penalty, is no ground not to require the deposit of duty. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Time for deposit of duty is extended by one month from today. If the amount of duty is deposited within one month, the appeal of the petitioner will be heard on merits. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE November 30, 2006 ( RAJESH BINDAL ) ashwani JUDGE Pag e