2008 (9) TMI 389 - HC - Central Excise

Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Held that - The order directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of ₹ 1 crore by way of pre-deposit is very harsh and that too in light of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner at the time of hearing of stay application that the financial position of the petitioner is very weak. Moreover, it is not borne out from the order of the Tribunal as to how the amount of ₹ 1 crore was ordered to be deposited. Interest of justice would better be served if the petitioner is ordered to deposit a sum of ₹ 25 lacs within six weeks from today. Accordingly, the petitioner is hereby directed to deposit a sum of ₹ 10 lacs within two weeks and remaining amount of ₹ 15 lacs within four weeks thereafter

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order of Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal directing deposit of Rs. 1 crore towards duty under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the order passed by the Tribunal directing the deposit of Rs. 1 crore within 12 weeks and filing a compliance report. The petitioner argued that the order was harsh considering their financial position, and the Tribunal did not provide any reason for the amount. The petitioner claimed a strong case on merits and that failure to deposit the amount would frustrate pending appeals. The respondent contended that the Tribunal considered all aspects and the petitioner's conduct warranted the deposit. The respondent highlighted the petitioner's attempts to delay proceedings and non-compliance with notices, resulting in a duty demand of Rs. 3.28 crores. The respondent argued that the deposit was justified given the penalties and interest involved.

The High Court, after hearing both parties and reviewing lower authorities' orders, found the Rs. 1 crore deposit order to be harsh, especially considering the petitioner's weak financial position. The Court refrained from delving into the merits of the case but emphasized that the petitioner should not be prejudiced without a full appeal hearing. Therefore, the Court directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 25 lakhs within six weeks, with Rs. 10 lakhs due in two weeks and the remaining Rs. 15 lakhs within four weeks thereafter. Failure to comply would result in dismissal of pending appeals. The Court stressed the need for cooperation during appeal hearings and disposal.

In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the petition without costs, modifying the Tribunal's order to a reduced deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs within six weeks to allow the pending appeals to proceed. The Court balanced the interests of justice with the financial constraints of the petitioner, ensuring a fair opportunity for appeal without undue hardship.