2012 (2) TMI 357 - HC - Central Excise

Pre-deposit for admissibility of appeal petitioner pleaded financial hardship seeked part relief - Held that - Petitioner is directed to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the sales tax said to be payable by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from today for admissibility of appeal.

Summary

Issues:
1. Pre-deposit of service tax under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
2. Consideration of financial hardship in directing pre-deposit.
3. Substantiation of financial hardship claim with material evidence.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a writ petition challenging the respondent's proceedings directing the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of the entire service tax amounting to Rs.18,68,852 under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, by a specified date. The petitioner raised the issue of financial hardship, contending that it was not properly considered by the respondent before passing the impugned order. The petitioner proposed to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the service tax within four weeks to enable the appeal's hearing and disposal on merits and in accordance with the law.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the financial hardship claim was not adequately substantiated by the petitioner with material evidence, leading the respondent to insist on the pre-deposit of the entire service tax amount as a pre-condition for hearing the appeal. In response, the court, after considering the submissions of both parties and examining the available records, directed the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the sales tax payable within four weeks. Upon such deposit, the respondent was instructed to hear and dispose of the appeal promptly and in compliance with the law. The writ petition was allowed accordingly, with no costs imposed, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

This judgment highlights the importance of balancing the requirements of pre-deposit under tax laws with considerations of financial hardship raised by the petitioner. The court's decision to order a partial pre-deposit reflects a pragmatic approach to address the issue, ensuring a fair opportunity for the appeal to be heard and decided on its merits while upholding legal principles and procedural requirements.