9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 331X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mplete waiver of pre-deposit. - Partial stay granted. - Appeal No.E/86967-86968/14-Mum - - - Dated:- 25-8-2014 - Ashok Jindal and P S Pruthi, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri A Hidayullah Sr Adv. With Shri M P Joshi, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Shobha Ram, Commissioner (AR) JUDGEMENT Per: Ashok Jindal: The applicant is seeking waiver of pre-deposit of ₹ 14,98,32,257/- along with interest and penalty of ₹ 7,50,49,796/- which has been confirmed in the impugned order. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is manufacturer of two wheelers scooter/motor cycle. Applicant is having 4 units located at Akurdi, (Pune), Chakan (Pune), Waluj (Aurangabad) and Pant Nagar (Uttarakhand). The applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . To support this contention he relied upon the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of C.Ex. Bangalore-I Vs. Ecof Industries Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2012 (277) ELT 317 (Kar.) which has been followed by this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Tvs Motor Company Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai, reported in 2010-(XCI)-GJX-1808-CESTAT . He further submits that in Pantnagar unit they are not exclusively manufacturing exempted goods. In fact some of their activities are amounting to manufacture as deemed manufacture and are paying duty thereon and in some cases they are paying Cess also. Therefore, it cannot be termed that the Pantnagar unit is manufacturing exclusively, exempted goods. He further s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, whatever credit is attributable to exempted goods may not be distributed by the applicant. In these circumstances, applicants have failed to make out a case of complete waiver of pre-deposit. Further, we find that in this case another issue raised by the Ld. Counsel is for invocation of extended period of limitation. Prima facie we find force in the contention of the Ld. Counsel that extended period is not invokable. Therefore, we find that the demand which pertains to normal period of limitation comes out to ₹ 3.77 Crores. In these circumstances, we direct the applicant to make pre-deposit of 10% of the total demand of duty confirmed against the applicant in the impugned order within a period of eight weeks and report compli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
