2014 (9) TMI 244 - SC - Central Excise

Restoration of appeal - Non compliance with pre deposit order - Held that - Appellant has deposited ₹ 9 lakhs. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed additional documents. He has filed a Certificate dated 1-10-2012 issued by the Superintendent, Office of the Superintendent, Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Range - GONDIA. This certificate states that the appellant has deposited an amount of ₹ 9 lakhs on 1-10-2012. In view of this, it is clear that the appellant has deposited an additional amount of ₹ 9 lakhs. Thus, a total amount of ₹ 18 lakhs has been deposited by the appellant. - appeal restored before the tribunal - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deposit of amount as a condition precedent under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.
2. Dismissal of appeal by the Tribunal due to failure to deposit the required amount.
3. Rejection of restoration applications by the Tribunal.
4. Challenge of the rejection order through a Writ Petition.
5. Dismissal of the appeal by the High Court for non-disclosure of relevant information.
6. Filing of Central Excise Appeal challenging the rejection of restoration application.
7. Direction by the Supreme Court to deposit an additional amount.
8. Revival of the appeal by the Supreme Court.

Analysis:
1. The appellant was directed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal to deposit an amount under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act for the appeal to be entertained. Initially, the amount was set at &8377; 18 lakhs, later reduced to &8377; 9 lakhs. However, the appellant could only deposit &8377; 6 lakhs, leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the Tribunal.

2. Subsequently, the appellant's restoration applications were rejected, leading to the filing of a Writ Petition challenging the rejection. The High Court dismissed the appeal on the grounds of non-disclosure of relevant information regarding the dismissal of the Writ Petition.

3. The appellant then filed a Central Excise Appeal challenging the rejection of the restoration application. The Supreme Court, after considering the case, directed the appellant to deposit an additional amount of &8377; 9 lakhs within a specified time for revival of the appeal.

4. The appellant complied with the Supreme Court's direction and deposited the additional amount. The Court acknowledged the deposit of the total required amount of &8377; 18 lakhs and consequently revived the appeal filed by the appellant in the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, directing the Tribunal to dispose of it in accordance with the law.

5. In conclusion, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal by reviving it based on the appellant's compliance with the deposit requirements, thereby allowing the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal to proceed with the case as per the law.