2014 (7) TMI 1025 - HC - Central Excise

Waiver of pre-deposit - 50% stay order was already grated - review of order - Held that - A perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal discloses that several contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner were taken into account, and they were dealt with extensively. From the order, it does not appear that the ground of financial incapacity or inability was not dealt with by the Tribunal, obviously because it was not pressed. The discussion was undertaken mostly on the contentions, touching upon the legality, or prima facie case. - order dated 09-01-2014, passed in C.E.A.No.48 of 2014 recalled - matter remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal only for the limited aspect.

Summary

Issues:
Review of order dated 09-01-2014 in Central Excise Appeal No.48 of 2013, waiver of pre-deposit, financial difficulty grounds not considered by Tribunal, applicability of State of Haryana v. M/s Maruti Udyog Ltd judgment, remand for fresh consideration by Tribunal.

Analysis:
The judgment involves a review petition seeking to reconsider the order passed in Central Excise Appeal No.48 of 2013. The appeal was filed against the respondent's order confirming the remand of two amounts and imposing penalties. The Court allowed the appeal by granting a waiver of pre-deposit to the extent of 50% of the amounts mentioned in the order-in-original. The petitioner then approached the Supreme Court, which directed no coercive steps for recovery and allowed withdrawal of the writ petition with the option to file a review petition. The Court considered the petitioner's contention regarding financial difficulty not being taken into account by the Tribunal and referenced the State of Haryana v. M/s Maruti Udyog Ltd judgment.

The Court acknowledged that total waiver could be ordered in deserving cases, especially when financial incapacity is pleaded. However, it noted that relief on grounds of inability cannot be granted by the High Court or Supreme Court unless dealt with by the Tribunal. The order passed by the Tribunal was examined, revealing that the ground of financial incapacity was not pressed and not extensively discussed. Therefore, the Court recalled the previous order to allow the petitioner to present their financial weakness or inability before the Tribunal. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration solely on this limited aspect, without expressing any opinion on other findings.

The Court requested the Tribunal to expedite the reconsideration and disposal within six weeks, during which the department was prohibited from taking coercive recovery steps against the petitioner. The judgment emphasized the importance of addressing financial difficulties in pre-deposit cases and the necessity for Tribunals to consider such grounds before higher courts intervene. The remand was solely for the purpose of allowing the petitioner to present their financial situation, ensuring a fair and comprehensive review of the case.