9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (5) TMI 168X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom the date of passing of the order, that is by 31-1-1998. Subject to the above deposit of duty, the rest of the demand of duty was dispensed with and its recovery was stayed. 2. Arguing on the application, Shri P.K. Dutta, ld. Advocate along with Shri Biswajit Mukherjee, ld. Advocate submitted that as is evident from the stay order passed by the Tribunal, the direction to deposit an amount of Rs. 2 lakhs in addition to the amount of Rs. 1,02,156/- already deposited by the appellants was made on an offer made by the applicants Advocate Shri A. Chakraborti. He submits that such an offer was made by the applicant by suppressing the fact that during the pendency of the appeal before the Collector (Appeals), applicant-appellant had challeng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omplying with the orders of the Hon ble High Court passed on 6-1-1997, as modified on 5-2-1997, the applicant moved a Miscellaneous Application before the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise on 8-4-1997 to keep the appeal proceedings in abeyance. The Commissioner (Appeals) however vide his order dated 15-7-1997 dismissed the appeals by observing that the orders of High Court have not been followed by the applicant. 3. Arguing on the application ld. Advocate Shri Dutta has submitted that all the above facts of the applicant moving the High Court for modification of Collector (Appeals) ordered subsequently for extension of time in depositing the duty were not brought to the notice of the Bench either in their Stay Application or at the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the time of passing of the Order and an offer to deposit another Rs. 2 lakhs was made without disclosing the factum of High Court s Order. We do not appreciate such a conduct of the applicant who must come to the Court with clean hands while seeking a discretionary and equitable relief. We find that after taking into consideration the entire facts and contention made by the applicant before the Hon ble High Court the direction to pre-deposit 50% of the confirmed duty was made. The applicants have subsequently approached the High Court with a prayer for extension of time to deposit the said 50%. No prayer was made to modify the order of deposit of 50%. If the applicants were feeling any difficulty to honour the High Court s Order the prope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
