9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (10) TMI 427 - HC - Central ExciseStay order - avoidable litigation, which the appellant department has undertaken - argument that under Section 35-C(2A) of the Act, the appeal is required to be heard within 180 days, would also be frivolous as the stay order is not co-terminus with the period prescribed for disposal of the appeal.- Held that - Supreme Court in the case of Kumar Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. (2005 - TMI - 47203 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) department should have been careful in filing such frivolous appeals, which involved unnecessary expenditure and time that could have been devoted on better activities. appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Issues:
Appeal against order granting relief on duty and penalty pre-deposit requirement. Analysis: The judgment pertains to an appeal filed under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The Tribunal had granted relief to the assessee-respondent by stating that pre-deposit of duty and penalty was not necessary, and recovery was stayed until the appeal's disposal. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by a previous order in the case of Tafe Limited v. C.C.E., Bangalore. Upon reviewing the case, the High Court observed that the department's decision to pursue the appeal was unnecessary and could have been avoided. The Court highlighted that the Tribunal has the authority to grant stay and waive the pre-deposit requirement. Additionally, the argument regarding the appeal's timeline under Section 35-C(2A) was deemed frivolous, as the stay order duration did not align with the disposal period specified. The Court referenced a Supreme Court ruling in Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. Kumar Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. to emphasize that the six-month timeframe for disposal was not mandatory. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal, criticizing the department for engaging in frivolous litigation that consumed resources and time. Furthermore, the Court directed a copy of the order to be sent to the Chief Commissioner, Central Excise, New Delhi, urging remedial measures to prevent such frivolous litigations in the future. This directive aimed to address the issue of unnecessary expenditure and time devoted to pursuing appeals that lacked merit, emphasizing the importance of allocating resources effectively and avoiding unnecessary legal battles.
|
