9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merits and in accordance with law - decided in favor of asssessee. - C.M.A.Nos.1543 and 1544 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1 of 2014 (2 Petitions) - - - Dated:- 21-8-2014 - R. Sudhakar And G. M. Akbar Ali,JJ. For the Appellant : Ms. Radhika Chandra Sekhar For the Respondents : Mr. Vikram Ramakrishnan Standing Counsel for 1st respondent JUDGMENT (Delivered by R. Sudhakar,J.) These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed challenging the Final Order Nos.40180 and 40181 of 2014, dated 19.3.2014, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (for brevity, the Tribunal ). 2.1. The facts in a nutshell are as under: The appellant is a proprietorship firm engaged in construction of commercial and resid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal was right in dismissing the appeal for non-compliance when the appellant had sought for further time to pre-deposit the amount due to financial hardship? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in directing the pre-deposit without considering the plea on limitation and plea on financial hardship? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in ignoring the law laid down by this Court in the case of Sanghvi and Doshi Enterprises (TCA.No.581 and 582 of 2011) wherein it was held that ownership is not a criteria to determine the status as a developer and the risk element involved should also be taken into consideration? 4. Whether in the facts and circumstances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eposit of ₹ 1 Crore. Today, the learned counsel for the appellant filed a document set showing compliance of the order of the Tribunal. As per the said report, payments were made as under: Date Amount 30.1.2014 Rs.25,00,000/- 18.3.2014 Rs.25,00,000/- 19.7.2014 Rs.25,00,000/- 19.8.2014 Rs.25,00,000/- Total Rs.1,00,00,000/- 5. According to the appellant, at the present, the construction industry is experiencing a slump and their business is presently going through a very serious financial crisis, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he consequences flowing from the order requiring the assessee to deposit full or part of the demand. There can be no rule of universal application in such matters and the order has to be passed keeping in view the factual scenario involved. Merely because this Court has indicated the principles that does not give a licence to the forum/authority to pass an order which cannot be sustained on the touchstone of fairness, legality and public interest. Where denial of interim relief may lead to public mischief, grave irreparable private injury or shake a citizen s faith in the impartiality of public administration, interim relief can be given. 9. It has become an unfortunate trend to casually dispose of stay applications by referring to decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions are undue hardship to such person and safeguard the interests of the Revenue . Therefore, while dealing with the application twin requirements of considerations i.e. consideration of undue hardship aspect and imposition of conditions to safeguard the interests of the Revenue have to be kept in view. 12. As noted above there are two important expressions in Section 35-F. One is undue hardship. This is a matter within the special knowledge of the applicant for waiver and has to be established by him. A mere assertion about undue hardship would not be sufficient. It was noted by this Court in S. Vasudeva v. State of Karnataka, (1993) 3 SCC 467 that under Indian conditions expression undue hardship is normally related to economic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
