2006 (3) TMI 408 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Stay application filed by the appellants regarding payment of Central Excise duty on purchased capital goods.
2. Interpretation of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the duty payment.
3. Maintainability of the appeal against the intermediate order before the Tribunal.

Analysis:
1. The appellants had purchased capital goods in 2002-2003 and paid Central Excise duty of Rs. 2,66,017. They claimed eligibility for 50% Modvat credit in the same financial year and the remaining 50% in the next financial year. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) directed them to pay 100% of the duty within ten days of receiving the order dated 24-6-05. The appellants appealed this decision, seeking a stay on the payment.

2. The order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) stated that failure to produce or deposit 100% of the confirmed duty within ten days would result in the dismissal of the appeal without further notice. The Revenue argued that this was an intermediate order, making the appeal against it non-maintainable. The Tribunal noted the lack of clarity regarding whether a final order had been issued by the Commissioner (Appeals) or if any subsequent orders were made. The Tribunal emphasized that an appeal against an intermediate order is not permissible and directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to issue a final order if not done already. Consequently, the appeal was deemed non-maintainable, and the stay application was disposed of accordingly.

3. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision centered on the procedural aspect of appeal jurisdiction concerning intermediate orders. The lack of a final order from the Commissioner (Appeals) led to the dismissal of the appeal before the Tribunal. This case underscores the importance of procedural compliance and the necessity of clear and conclusive orders in the appellate process to maintain the integrity of legal proceedings.