*1* kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CUSTOMS APPEAL No.14/2010 AND CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.15/2010 M/s Dinesh Agro Products Ltd.. ..Appellant -Versus- The Commissioner of Central Excise. ..Respondent ........... Mr.D.H.Nadkarni a/w Mr.V.N.Ansurkar i/b Legal Solutions for the Appellant. Mr.R.V.Desai, Senior Counsel a/w Mr.A.S.Rao, for the Respondent. .......... CORAM : V.C.DAGA & K.K.TATED, JJ. Date : 23rd February, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard. Perused appeals. 2 In the appeals filed by the Appellant, the Tribunal vide its order dated 14.10.2008 has directed pre-deposit. 3 The application for modification of the said order dated 14.10.2008 filed by the Appellant was rejected vide order dated 20.02.2009. 4 The order, directing pre-deposit, dated 14.10.2008 and the subsequent modification order dated 20.02.2009 were subject matter of the Writ Petition No.4034/2009. The said petition was dismissed by speaking order dated 18.06.2009; wherein the learned Division Bench refused to interfere with the order directing *2* pre-deposit. Since the order of pre-deposit was not complied by the Appellant, the appeals came to be dismissed vide order dated 26.06.2009 passed by the Tribunal. 5 The above order of the Tribunal is a subject matter in these appeals. 6 Without going into the question of maintainability of the present appeals before this Court against the order of dismissal of the appeals for want of compliance of the order of pre-deposit, the scope of appeal cannot be beyond considering the order of dismissal which was passed by the Tribunal on 26.06.2009 for want of compliance of the order of pre-deposit. 7 The order directing pre-deposit having been confirmed by the learned Division Bench in Writ Petition No.4034/2009 vide its order dated 18.06.2009, the said order will operate as res- judicata. The order of the Tribunal rejecting the appeals for non compliance of the order of pre-deposit, thus, cannot be faulted. No question of law is involved. 8 In this view of the matter, the present appeals are liable to be dismissed for want of any substantial question of law. Thus, both appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. (K.K.TATED, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)