2014 (12) TMI 322 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of pre-deposit - Modification of order - violation of principles of natural justice - submissions made by the appellant were not considered and a cross examination of the witnesses requested by the appellant was rejected - Held that - For modification of pre-deposit order that the facts involve in the present appeal and those involved in the case of M/s Atithi Gokul Automobile Works are similar. appellant have not given justifiable reasons for seeking cross examination before the Adjudicating Authority and that appellant cannot claim that there was a violation of principles of natural justice when the appellant himself remains absent in the adjudication proceedings. On merit also this Bench has give its observation while passing stay order and held that the issue need deeper considerations which could be done only at the time of final disposal of the appeal. At the same time, it is also recorded that no claim of severe financial hardship is available from the case records as per the submissions made by the appellant. In view of the above, appellant has no case for any modification on merits. - Modification denied.

Summary

Issues: Modification of pre-deposit order based on principles of natural justice and financial hardship.

Analysis:
1. Principles of Natural Justice and Modification Request:
The appellant sought modification of the pre-deposit order, arguing a violation of principles of natural justice due to the non-consideration of all submissions and the rejection of a cross-examination request. The appellant referenced a similar case involving M/s Atithi Gokul Automobile Works, where the issue was remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority. However, the tribunal noted that the appellant failed to provide justifiable reasons for the cross-examination request and remained absent during adjudication proceedings, undermining the claim of a violation of natural justice. The tribunal emphasized that a deeper consideration of the issue was necessary at the final disposal of the appeal.

2. Financial Hardship and Statutory Amendments:
The Revenue contended that the appellant lacked cooperation throughout the process, citing missed opportunities for hearings and non-cooperation during investigations. Despite the absence of severe financial hardship in the case records, the tribunal acknowledged recent statutory amendments to the Central Excise Act, 1944. Consequently, the pre-deposit amount of Rs. One Crore was reduced to Rs. 60 lakhs. The appellant was directed to comply with the revised pre-deposit within four weeks, with a stay on the recovery of the remaining penalty until the appeal's disposal.

3. Final Decision and Order:
After considering arguments from both sides and reviewing the case records, the tribunal found no merit in the appellant's modification request based on principles of natural justice. However, recognizing the legislative changes, the tribunal reduced the pre-deposit amount. The appellant was instructed to deposit Rs. 60 lakhs within a specified timeframe, with a stay on the remaining penalty recovery pending appeal disposal. The modification application was allowed to the extent of the revised pre-deposit amount, as pronounced in court on 09/09/2014.