2008 (9) TMI 775 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Pre-deposit requirement, penalty under Section 11AC, Rule 25 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, production of technical evidence, filing of miscellaneous application, interim stay order, opposition by revenue, consideration of submissions, listing of Miscellaneous Application, stay application hearing date.

In the judgment, the appellant was required to pre-deposit a specific amount along with penalty under Section 11AC and Rule 25 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. During the hearing, the appellants were directed to provide technical evidence to support their claim. However, the learned counsel failed to file a miscellaneous application along with the required fee to rely on the additional evidence, as per the CESTAT Procedure Rules. The Tribunal emphasized the need for proper procedure and directed the appellants to file the necessary application seeking permission to present the technical evidence, allowing the revenue the opportunity to counter it. The learned SDR was also directed to submit comments on the evidence provided.

The learned counsel agreed to submit the miscellaneous application along with the supporting documents for admission and requested an interim stay order to prevent the revenue from recovering the amount in question. This request was opposed by the learned SDR. After careful consideration of the submissions, the Tribunal instructed the appellants to file the miscellaneous application to seek permission for the additional evidence. The Registry was directed to list the Miscellaneous Application for review. In the meantime, the revenue was prohibited from recovering the amount until the stay application was heard. The SDR was tasked with examining the additional evidence and responding to the details in the balance-sheet. The Miscellaneous Application and stay application were scheduled for a hearing on 27th October 2008. The judgment was pronounced and dictated in open Court.