9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (3) TMI 762X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .N.S. Mohapatra, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri T.K. Kar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. Vide Stay Order No. S-1200-1201/Cal/2001, dt. 21-1-2001, the applicant M/s. S.R. Springs Pvt. Ltd. were directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- (rupees ten lakh) towards duty and Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lakh) towards penalty within a period of e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he final product. However, the said plea was not appreciated by the Bench by observing that the availability of credit depends upon number of factors and inasmuch as the appellant could not produce the statement showing the availability of the credit, the said plea was not entertained. Shri Bagaria submits that at the time of passing of the stay order, the exercise concerning verification of the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es on the statement produced by the appellant now before us. As such he submits that inasmuch as the duty liability would get neutralised with the credit available to the appellant, the stay order in question requiring the appellants to deposit an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- (rupees ten lakh) towards duty be modified. Shri Bagaria also pleads financial hardship. 3. We have also heard Shri T.K. Kar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of the stay order), which shows that the appellant have earned more credit than their duty liability confirmed under the impugned order. In these circumstances we are of the view that the stay order needs modification. Accordingly we dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of duty and penalty as directed in the said stay order. 5. Inasmuch as admittedly the said plea of availability of Mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue of imposition of personal penalty upon the appellant are left open for the Commissioner to decide in the de novo proceedings. 6. In view of the foregoing we allow the stay petition and remand the matter to the Commissioner for de novo adjudication in the light of the observations made by us in the preceding paragraphs. 7. The appeal of Shri S.H. Mohan Lal Sharma, of the appellant company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
