9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dment, there is as of date no provision in the CE Act which mandates pre-deposit in appeals pending before the CESTAT prior to 6th August 2014, the Appellant has a statable case on the strength of the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. Vs. UOI, [2000 (2) TMI 823 - Supreme Court of India]. - Decided in favour of appellant - SERTA No. 5 of 2016 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t weeks failing which the Appellant's appeals before the CESTAT shall be dismissed. 5. One of the issues raised in the present petition concerns the applicability of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ('CE Act') which talks of pre-deposit. This Section was amended vide the Finance Act, 2014 with effect from 6th August 2014. Pursuant to the amendment, the second proviso ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ior to the amendment, there is as of date no provision in the CE Act which mandates pre-deposit in appeals pending before the CESTAT prior to 6th August 2014. 8. Prima facie it does appear to the Court that in the absence of any saving clause, the Appellant has a statable case on the strength of the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. Vs. UOI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
