2009 (6) TMI 114 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Stay application against order of pre-deposit of duty and penalty.
2. Validity of demands related to duty on metalized films, laminated polyester films, inputs for exports, and intermediate products.
3. Dispute over demands for clandestine removal.
4. Interim protection granted by the Appellate Tribunal.
5. Existence of substantial question of law in the Appeal.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against an order directing pre-deposit of duty and penalty by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appellant company, engaged in manufacturing laminated polyester film and metallised polyester film, contested demands and penalties imposed by the Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise, NOIDA.

2. The Appellate Tribunal analyzed the submissions and observed that duty on certain products had been duly assessed and paid to the Central Government. It was noted that demands related to inputs for exports and intermediate products might not be sustainable, but demands for clandestine removal were not disputed at the stay stage. Consequently, the appellant was directed to deposit a specific amount towards duty and penalty within eight weeks.

3. During the hearing, the appellant was directed to deposit the undisputed amount towards duty and penalty as an interim measure. The condition of pre-deposit for the remaining amount was waived by the Appellate Tribunal.

4. The appellant's counsel failed to establish the presence of any substantial question of law requiring consideration in the Appeal, leading to the dismissal of the Appeal by the High Court.

5. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the Appeal, upholding the decision of the Appellate Tribunal regarding the pre-deposit of duty and penalty. The judgment highlighted the importance of complying with statutory requirements and the need to address disputed issues effectively during legal proceedings.