Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (10) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2015 (10) TMI 1349 - AT - Central Excise


Issues: Application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty under Rule 26(1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002.

The judgment addresses an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 5.59 Crores and an equal penalty, along with a personal penalty of Rs. 20.00 Lakhs on an individual under Rule 26(1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The applicant argued that despite declaring themselves as a manufacturer to qualify for a tender, they were actually a trader, and the demand raised by the department had no legal basis as it was solely based on a statement made by the Constituted Power of Attorney of the applicant firm. The applicant also highlighted the absence of incriminating documents during the investigation period. The applicant, through their senior advocate, expressed financial hardship and offered to deposit Rs. 20.00 Lakhs in addition to the amount already deposited. The Revenue's representative reiterated the findings of the Commissioner. After hearing both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal considered whether the applicant was a manufacturer or a trader, emphasizing the need to assess the evidence. Acknowledging the financial difficulties faced by the applicant and the amount already deposited, the Tribunal deemed the offer to deposit Rs. 20.00 Lakhs reasonable. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit the specified amount within eight weeks, with non-compliance leading to dismissal of the appeals without further notice. Compliance would result in the waiver of balance dues against one applicant and all dues against another, with the recovery stayed during the appeal's pendency.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates