Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2016 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 1110 - HC - Central ExciseWaiver of pre-deposit of ₹ 9,80,000/- - CENVAT credit wrongly availed - Held that - the petitioner s factory was destroyed by fire, which was also reported in the Tamil Dailys dated 09.12.2010 and also taking note of the fact that the Writ Petition is pending before this Court from 2014, and there is an order of stay, ends of justice would be met if the amount directed to be remitted towards pre-deposit, is reduced - the petitioner directed to deposit a sum of ₹ 2,50,000/- - petition disposed off - decided partly in favor of petitioner.
Issues:
Challenge to order under Central Excise Act - Recovery of CENVAT credit, interest, and penalty - Stay of order - Reduction of pre-deposit amount. Analysis: The petitioner challenged an order passed under the Central Excise Act, seeking relief from the recovery of wrongly availed CENVAT credit, interest, and penalty. The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise had directed the recovery of a specific amount from the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an Appeal and sought an unconditional stay of the order, emphasizing financial difficulties due to a fire accident in 2010. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) directed the petitioner to pre-deposit 50% of the disputed amount, leading to the petitioner approaching the High Court. The High Court considered the circumstances, including the fire incident at the petitioner's factory and the pendency of the Writ Petition since 2014 with a stay order in place. Acknowledging the petitioner's prima facie case and financial position, the Court decided to reduce the pre-deposit amount. The petitioner was directed to deposit a reduced sum within a specified timeframe, allowing the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) to proceed with the Appeal on merits once the condition was met. In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the Writ Petition with the specified terms, indicating no costs to be incurred. The connected Miscellaneous Petitions were also closed as a result of the judgment.
|