9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 651X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not a speaking order, lower appellate authority have not considered the merits of the case, order is not passed on merits, pre-deposit waived, stay applications as well as the appeals are disposed of by way of remand - E/955 & 956/10 - A/575-576/2011-WZB/C-II(EB) - Dated:- 10-6-2011 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Mr. P.R. Chandrasekharan, JJ. Appearance: Shri.Gajendra Jain, Advocate for appellant Shri.K. Lal, SDR, for respondent Per: Ashok Jindal 1. The appellants have filed these appeals against the impugned order wherein the appeals of the appellants were dismissed for non-compliance with the stay order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants are the manufacturer of excisabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se Act, 1944, on the appellants and a penalty of Rs.10 lakhs was also imposed on Shri Sushil Kumar Beswala, Director of the appellants firm. An amount of Rs.23,84,368/- of the rebate was also confirmed under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The said order was appealed by the appellants before the first appellate authority. 4. The appellants were directed through stay order dated 21/01/2010 by the first appellate authority to make a pre-deposit of 50% of taxes and 50% of penalties, which the appellants failed to comply with, therefore, their appeals were dismissed for non-compliance of the stay order. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before us. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , this Tribunal while considering their stay applications have to consider the norms laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of CCE, Guntur Vs. Sri Chaitanya Educational Committee, reported in 2011 (22) STR 135 (AP) and the appellants be asked to make a pre-deposit and on such pre-deposit the matter be sent back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on merits. 8. Heard both sides. 9. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides and after going through the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Sri Chaitanya Educational Committee (supra), we find that the Hon'ble High Court has laid down the guidelines for dealing the stay application, which are re-produced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the statutory guidance while exercising general powers or expressly conferred incidental powers. 10. The guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Aandhra Pradesh are applicable to all the authorities while considering the stay applications. These guidelines are binding of the Commissioner (Appeals), also who failed to follow the same while passing the stay order. Therefore, after going through the said guidelines, we find that the stay order with a direction to the appellants to make a pre-deposit of 50% of taxes and 50% of penalties passed by the first appellate authority is an order in routine manner unmindful of the consequences.We have considered the submissions made by the Ld. Advocate and find that the impugned order is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
