2012 (5) TMI 453 - AT - Central Excise

Whether matter can be kept pending before Tribunal on ground of pendency of an application/petition before High Court when order staying the operation of the Predeposit Order or modifying the Predeposit Order has not been passed by High Court - assessee neither pre-deposited the directed amount nor reported any compliance on stipulated date - Held that - It is settled position of law pendency of any appeal or for that matter any proceedings which is akin to appeal do not operate as a stay, the stay has to be obtained specifically from the higher forum. Therefore, Tribunal was justified in dismissing the appeal on ground of failure of assessee to make pre-deposit within stipulated time,

Summary

Issues: Non-compliance with predeposit order, jurisdiction of the Tribunal during pendency of a matter before the High Court.

In this case, the Appellate Tribunal directed the Appellants to make a predeposit of 25% of the duty confirmed within eight weeks and report compliance. The Appellants failed to predeposit the amount or report compliance on the specified date. The Appellants informed the Tribunal about a pending Writ Petition before the High Court, but failed to produce any orders modifying the Stay Order. The Department argued that the pendency of an application before the High Court should not keep the matter pending before the Tribunal. Citing precedents, the Department contended that in the absence of a stay order modifying the predeposit order, the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to proceed with the case. The Tribunal agreed with the Department, emphasizing the importance of compliance with the predeposit order. The Tribunal referred to previous judgments, including one by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, highlighting that the pendency of an appeal does not automatically stay proceedings. The Tribunal dismissed the Appeals for non-compliance with the predeposit order, as per the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

The Tribunal's decision was based on the Appellants' failure to comply with the predeposit order within the specified timeline and their inability to produce any orders modifying the Stay Order from the High Court. The Tribunal stressed the importance of following the predeposit directives and highlighted that the pendency of a matter before a higher forum does not automatically stay proceedings. Citing legal precedents, the Tribunal emphasized that specific stay orders must be obtained to halt proceedings. The Tribunal dismissed the Appeals due to the Appellants' non-compliance with the predeposit order, as failure to predeposit within the stipulated time resulted in the dismissal of the Appeals without further notice. The Tribunal's decision was made in line with the principles outlined in previous judgments and the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Overall, the Tribunal's judgment focused on the necessity of complying with predeposit orders and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to proceed with a case in the absence of a stay order modifying the predeposit directive. The Tribunal highlighted the legal requirement for specific stay orders from a higher forum to halt proceedings and emphasized that the pendency of a matter before a High Court does not automatically stay proceedings. As the Appellants failed to predeposit the required amount within the specified timeframe and did not produce any orders modifying the Stay Order, the Tribunal dismissed the Appeals for non-compliance with the predeposit order, in accordance with the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944.