Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2006 (5) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2006 (5) TMI 107 - HC - Central Excise

Issues:
Challenge to Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal's order for pre-deposit in appeal.

Analysis:
The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad heard the challenge against the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal's order, which required a pre-deposit of Rs. 5 lakhs for deciding the petitioner's appeal, instead of the original amount of Rs. 31,10,615. The petitioner's grounds for waiver of the pre-deposit included fulfilling a portion of the export obligation due to unit sealing by the Pollution Department, suffering significant financial losses, and the director's illness with cancer. The Tribunal's order mentioned the department's seizure of the petitioner's machinery without adverse comment. The High Court noted that the pre-deposit amount was relatively small compared to the petitioner's circumstances and that insisting on it would practically nullify the right of appeal. Consequently, the High Court found the Tribunal's order to be virtually denying the petitioner's right of appeal based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

The High Court disposed of the petition by directing the Tribunal to decide the petitioner's appeal within two months from the date of presenting the order without requiring any pre-deposit. However, the petitioner was prohibited from alienating or encumbering any assets of the company until the appeal was decided. If the petitioner sought multiple adjournments for the appeal hearing, the condition of pre-deposit of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed by the Tribunal would be reinstated. The High Court's decision aimed to ensure the petitioner's right of appeal was not unjustly hindered by excessive pre-deposit requirements, considering the petitioner's situation and the relatively small amount involved.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates