2013 (12) TMI 1240 - HC - Central Excise

Jurisdiction of Tribunal - Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in recording the finding on merits while dealing with an application for dispensation of pre-deposit Held that - The Tribunal in exceptional cases can assess the prima facie case treating the same to be a hardship for maintaining the appeal by dispensation of pre-deposit in the present case, the Tribunal while doing so observed adversely on merit of the case - the Tribunal cannot do it in a negative way Thus, the portion which starts with the words the issue is covered by the precedent Tribunal s decision in the case of LCS City Makers Pvt. Ltd. v. CST 2012 (6) TMI 363 - CESTAT, CHENNAI - The Commissioner shall decide the matter independently, without being influenced by the observations made the petitioner directed to make a payment of 50% of the demanded amount as directed by the Tribunal Decided partly in favour of Petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in recording findings on merits during an application for dispensation of pre-deposit.

Analysis:
1. The High Court admitted the appeal based on the question of law regarding the Tribunal's justification in assessing the prima facie case and maintaining the appeal by dispensation of pre-deposit. The Court noted that while the Tribunal can consider exceptional cases as hardships for dispensation, it cannot make adverse observations on the merit of the case in a negative manner. The Court expunged and deleted the portion of the Tribunal's finding that referred to a precedent Tribunal decision against the assessee. The Court directed the Commissioner of Appeals to independently decide on this aspect during the appeal hearing, without being influenced by the Tribunal's observations. The Court also mandated that the order would be effective only if the petitioner paid 50% of the demanded amount within 15 days; otherwise, the order would be recalled, and the Tribunal's decision would stand revived.

2. The High Court disposed of the appeal accordingly, emphasizing that the Commissioner of Appeals should decide the matter independently without being influenced by the expunged observations. The Court also dismissed the miscellaneous petition in this regard.