2018 (12) TMI 101 - HC - Central Excise

Admitting the notice for hearing - Held that - Issue notice to show cause as to why the appeal be not admitted to hearing. It is directed that, subject to appellant releasing 50% of the amount due in terms of impugned judgment dated 20th March, 2018 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal to the respondent entrepreneur on furnishing solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within four weeks of furnishing of such surety, payment of balance shall remain stayed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Certification of the impugned order
2. Stay on payment subject to certain conditions
3. Admission of appeal and interim order

Certification of the impugned order:
In MCC No. 267/2018, the court allowed the application supported by an affidavit, dispensing with the provision of the certified copy of the impugned order. This decision was made based on the reasons stated in the application, indicating a procedural aspect where the court waived the requirement for the certified copy.

Stay on payment subject to certain conditions:
In CEA No. 21/2018, the court directed the appellant to release 50% of the amount due to them in terms of the impugned judgment passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal to the respondent entrepreneur. The remaining amount claimed as refunded by the respondent was stayed subject to the appellant furnishing a solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within a specified timeframe. This condition was imposed to ensure the protection of the respondent's interests while allowing the appellant to proceed with the appeal process.

Admission of appeal and interim order:
The court issued a notice to show cause as to why the appeal should not be admitted to hearing, indicating a procedural step to determine the admissibility of the appeal. Additionally, the court referred to a previous order passed by the Supreme Court in a related matter, highlighting the legal context in which the current appeal was being considered. An interim order was issued in favor of the revenue, pending further proceedings, demonstrating the court's approach to balancing the interests of the parties involved.

Overall, the judgment reflects a careful consideration of procedural requirements, financial implications, and legal precedents in addressing the issues raised in the case. The court's decisions regarding certification, payment stay conditions, and appeal admission demonstrate a balanced approach to ensuring justice and fairness in the legal proceedings.