9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (11) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ified mandamus to call for and quash the proceedings of the first respondent-Tribunal in its Order No. 221/93-C in E/Misc. 705, 1019 and 1187/92-C E/Stay/1697/92-C in E/1426/91-C, whereunder the petitioner was directed to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 1,75,00,000 (Rs. 1.75 Crores) and to furnish bank guarantee for the balance amount of duty within ten days to enable the Tribunal to proceed with the hearing of the main appeal and consequently, direct the first respondent-Tribunal to proceed with the hearing of the main appeal and consequently, direct the first respondent-Tribunal to hear and dispose of the main appeal without insisting upon any deposit of duty and penalty. The appeal before the Tribunal was filed against the order of the Collect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 35B of the Central Excise Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Section 35F provides that where in any appeal the decision or order appealed against relates to any duty demanded in respect of goods, the person desirous of filing such an appeal shall pending the appeal deposit with the adjudicating authority the duty demanded or the penalty levied. The Proviso to Section 35F provides that where in any particular case, the Tribunal is of the opinion that the deposit of duty demanded or penalty levied would cause "undue hardship to such person", the Appellate Tribunal may dispense with such deposit subject to such condition as it may deem fit to impose so as to safeguard the interests of the Revenue. The petitioners moved the Tribunal inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Supreme Court. In substance, the endeavour of the learned counsel was to substantiate the plea that the proceedings against the petitioners were barred by limitation for the reason that the respondents-Department could not avail, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the extended period of limitation of five years provided under Section 11A of the Act. It was also contended that the product in question could not be said to be a marketable product, attracting the levy of excise duty and this aspect also was not taken due account of by the Tribunal. The learned counsel also contended that the order of the Tribunal must be considered to be a non-speaking order, since it does not give sufficient reasons to justify its order and at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. That apart, the learned counsel also contended relying upon some of the decisions of the Supreme Court as also this Court that normally this Court may not be pleased to interfere with an order of the nature passed by the Tribunal and that at any rate, the order under challenge is a reasonable one not warranting any interference, having regard to the fact that only a portion of the duty alone has been directed to be paid pending disposal of the appeal as a condition for the waiver of the deposit contemplated under Section 35F of the Act. 6.I have carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on either side. In my view, there is no justification for me for adverting to the various decisions relied upon by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an Appellate Court over the order of the Tribunal. Instead the consideration by this Court should be one keeping thus in mind that it is functioning as a supervisory and controlling authority. Consequently, unless the order of the Tribunal is shown to be such, which could not have been passed by any reasonable authority, exercising such jurisdiction or so shocking to the conscience of this Court, there is no scope for interference in a routine manner. 8.In view of the above, it becomes necessary for me to consider the grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner made about the non-application of mind and non-furnishing of sufficient and relevant reasons as sufficient factors vitiating the order. As noticed earlier, the said grievan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d before this Court against the Tribunal. It is too much also to expect the Tribunal to embark upon still further detailed consideration even at that stage of the matter. Apart from the fact that as to who was responsible for the inaccuracy relating to the data pertaining to the differential quantity of the commodity at this stage, the fact that the Tribunal has taken into account that fact also and given due allowance also by considerably reducing the quantum of money to be deposited cannot be totally ignored. The very fact that the Tribunal has thought fit to direct the deposit of only a portion of the amount would go to show that the Tribunal has taken into account the over all hardships also and it is futile to contend that unless the v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
