Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 1996 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1996 (2) TMI 151 - HC - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Petition for quashing order of Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. 2. Consideration of financial position for waiver of excise duty pre-deposit. 3. Allegations of defective forgings and transfer without permission. Detailed Analysis: 1. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, which rejected the petitioner's application for waiver in part. The dispute arose from a demand of excise duty of Rs. 2,86,036 imposed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, which was challenged by the petitioner before the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1 lac instead of the full amount under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 2. The petitioner contended that the impugned order did not consider the balance-sheet of the company and failed to acknowledge the petitioner's financial constraints. However, the court found no merit in these arguments. The court observed that the petitioner did not provide substantial evidence to support their claim of financial hardship. The balance-sheet as of March 31, 1995, did not conclusively prove the inability to pay the required deposit. The court noted the petitioner's stock in trade and outstanding debtors, indicating potential liquidity. 3. The issue of defective forgings and their transfer without permission was also raised. The Tribunal had considered this aspect and concluded that it was a factual matter requiring evidence for resolution. The petitioner's argument that the forgings were treated as scrap was contested, alleging a violation of rules under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The court found no grounds to interfere with the Tribunal's decision, deeming it reasonable and based on judicial considerations. In conclusion, the court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the order of the Appellate Tribunal was justified. The petitioner was given two months to deposit the required amount, with the appeal to be decided thereafter.
|