2020 (1) TMI 1369 - AT - Central Excise

Modification of the stay order - HELD THAT - On perusal of the records vide order dt. 20.05.2013, the respondent was directed to supply the copy of documents to the appellant. Thereafter, the stay application was heard by this Tribunal on 14.07.2014 and recorded the findings - This Tribunal disposed of the stay application as well as the miscellaneous application for supply of the documents and directed the appellant to make a pre-deposit of ₹ 50 lakhs towards duty and ₹ 10 lakhs towards penalty. As the matter is seized with the Hon ble High Court and there is a direction to this Tribunal not to dispose of the appeal on account of non-deposit in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, therefore, we decline to entertain the miscellaneous applications filed by both the sides till disposal of the matter by the Hon ble High Court of Punjab Haryana. Accordingly, all the applications filed by both the sides are stand dismissed as the matter is seized with the Hon ble High Court.

Summary

Issues:
Miscellaneous applications for modification of stay order, early hearing, cross-examination, CBI inquiry, compliance of tribunal order, early hearing by Revenue, seeking copies of early hearing application, direction for reply to Chief Commissioner regarding PMO's directions.

Analysis:
The appellant filed various miscellaneous applications, starting with a modification of the stay order passed by the Tribunal in 2014. Subsequent applications were made for early hearing, cross-examination, CBI inquiry, compliance of the tribunal's order, seeking copies of the Revenue's early hearing application, and direction for a reply to the Chief Commissioner regarding PMO's directions. The Tribunal noted that the respondent was directed to supply documents to the appellant as per the order dated 20.05.2013. The Tribunal had previously disposed of the stay application and miscellaneous application for document supply, directing the appellant to make a pre-deposit of ?50 lakhs towards duty and ?10 lakhs towards penalty. The appellant challenged this order in the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana, which directed that the appeal shall not be disposed of for non-deposit of duty and penalty amount. Due to the matter being with the High Court and the direction not to dispose of the appeal, the Tribunal declined to entertain the miscellaneous applications until the High Court's decision. Consequently, all applications were dismissed as the matter was sub judice before the High Court.

This judgment highlights the importance of compliance with tribunal orders, the process of challenging tribunal decisions in higher courts, and the impact of such challenges on further proceedings. The Tribunal's decision to wait for the High Court's ruling underscores the hierarchy of legal authorities and the need to respect ongoing legal processes. The case demonstrates the interplay between different levels of the judiciary and the significance of following legal procedures diligently.