9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (12) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uri Anil Sehgal, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri Somesh Arora, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : P.K. Kapoor, Member (T)]. The above captioned Misc. applications have been filed seeking modification of the Tribunal s interim Order No. Misc./E/247/94-B1, dated 26-8-1994 directing the applicants to deposit the duty amounting to Rs. 36,44,264/- + Rs. 54,878/- within 8 weeks of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Hon ble Karnataka High Court :- That the operation of the order dated 3-12-1993 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 1154/1988, be and the same is hereby stayed until further orders from this Court. Issued under my hand and the seal of this Court, this the 24th day of January, 1994." Ld. counsel further submitted that in view of the operation of the single judge order in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the demand was not sustainable. He contended that even if the operation of single judge order in the case of M/s. Nectar Beverages had not been stayed by the Div. Bench of Karnataka High Court the appellants would have a prima facie case in view of the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Partap Steel Rolling Mills v. CEGAT, reported in 1993 (67) E.L.T. 216 holding that contrar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record of the case. The applicants have filed a copy of the interim order of the High Court of Karnataka dated 27-1-1994 in Writ Petition No. 3924/1933 reproduced above staying the operation of the single judge order of the High Court in the Writ Petition No. 1154/88, dated 3-12-1993 in the case of M/s. Nectar Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI. No other order of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court after the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e contrary views expressed by the different High Courts in the country in the matter, there would be sufficient indication of existence of prima facie case in favour of the applicants. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case we hold that the applicants have been able to make out a prima facie case warranting dispensation of the pre-deposit. We, therefore modify the earlier ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
