2006 (1) TMI 623 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Correctness of the order directing the petitioner to pay a further sum as pre-deposit in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.
2. Interpretation of whether a further pre-deposit can be demanded when a pre-deposit has already been made during remand proceedings.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The petitioner challenged an order directing them to pay an additional sum as pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. The order arose from a fresh order by the Commissioner of Central Excise following a remand order by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had demanded a pre-deposit of Rs. 4 lakhs from the petitioner during the remand proceedings. The petitioner contended that the pre-deposit already made should suffice, citing a decision by a Division Bench of the High Court. The respondent disagreed with this interpretation. The Court noted that the question of demanding a further pre-deposit after one made during remand proceedings was settled by the decision in Super Tyres Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, and ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the Tribunal's order.

Issue 2: The Court, following the precedent set in the Super Tyres case, held that the order passed by the Tribunal demanding a further pre-deposit was not valid. The Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the Tribunal's order, and directed that the petitioner's appeal be heard on merits without requiring any additional pre-deposit. The Court emphasized the need for the Tribunal to expedite the disposal of the appeal, ensuring a fair and timely resolution for the petitioner.