9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 837X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . D. D. Sharma, Advocate. ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 7.10.2013 (Annexure A-1) passed by the Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") claiming the following substantial questions of law:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o March 1995. Accordingly, two show cause notices dated 28.7.1995 and 3.4.1995 (Annexure A-5 Colly) were issued to the appellant for recovery of duty amounting to Rs. 71,55,338.73 and Rs. 2,10,577.50, respectively. The said show cause notices were duly replied by the appellant. The adjudicating authority vide order dated 27.11.1998 confirmed the demand. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... precedent for hearing of the appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal vide order dated 7.10.2013 (Annexure A-1) directed the appellant to deposit Rs. 50 lacs as a condition precedent for hearing of the appeal. He further submitted that the appellant has a strong prima facie case and, therefore, no amount is required to be deposited for he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
