9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (8) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioners are represented by Sri A.P. Mathur, Advocate while the respondents are represented by Sri Vikram Gulati, Advocate. Both of them have been heard. 2. The petitions are directed against an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Ghaziabad whereby in exercise of powers under the proviso to Section 35F, he partly waived the condition of the pre-deposit of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he amount already debited while sending the inputs or partially processed inputs from his factory. Certain goods were sent by the petitioners for processing and the petitioners availed Modvat credit in respect of inputs used therein but the goods were not received back in the factory of the petitioners within a period of 60 days, as prescribed in sub-rule (11). Both the petitioners after the expir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y levied would cause undue hardship to such person. The petitioners, therefore, moved applications for the waiver of the conditions of pre-deposit and the Commissioner has directed the petitioners to deposit Rs. 2,02,000/- and Rs. 7,50,000/- respectively. The Commissioner has reduced the amount after looking to the merits of the petitioners' case and has also stated that the appellants have not pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not received back at all. The learned Commissioner had dispensed with the pre-deposit of a very negligible part of the demand. Looking to the circumstances that the denial of Modvat credit is based on a technical default, a fair exercise of discretion under the proviso to Section 35F would justify that pre-deposit of a substantial part of demand should have been dispensed with. 6. The writ peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
