Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2008 (3) TMI 342

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t aside the order dismissing the petitioner's appeal and also the stay order dated 20-6-1997 and we are inclined to direct the Tribunal to hear the petitioner's appeal on merits and consider the petitioner's submission whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of judgment of the Tribunal rendered on 25-9-2000 as confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 19-4-2006. Petition is allowed. - 2213 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 11-3-2008 - M.S. Shah and Ravi R. Tripathi, JJ. [Judgment per : M.S. Shah, J. (Oral)]. - This is an unfortunate case where the Tribunal imposed a very harsh and onerous condition on the petitioner to pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 1 crore for hearing the appeal filed before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appella .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -1997. Ultimately, when the matter came up before the Tribunal on 18-11-1997, on the ground that the petitioner-appellant had failed to comply with the condition stipulated in the pre-deposit order dated 20-6-1997, dismissed the appeal only on the ground of non-compliance of the stay order. 3. The dispute between the petitioner and the Central Excise authorities was whether the products being manufactured by the petitioner fell under Heading 7012.10 of Central Excise Tariff as contended by the petitioner or under Residuary Heading 7015 as contended by the department. Similar orders were passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise against six other units including M/s. Pioneer Scientific Glass Works. In their case also, the Tribunal had p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re imposed by the Tribunal in the order dated 20-6-1997 was too harsh. It is submitted that the Tribunal had merely considered that the sales revenue of the petitioner-company for the year ended 31-3-1997 was over Rs. 2 crores and on that basis alone, the order was passed for pre-deposit of an amount of Rs. 1 crore. Mr. Shah has vehemently submitted that when a company has turnover of Rs. 2 crores, such a company would never be in a position to have cash surplus of Rs. 1 crore. In fact, turnover of Rs. 2 crores would mean that after paying for raw materials, fuel, electricity, labour charges and after discharging the interest liability and tax liability, the company would be left with cash surplus of only a few lacs of rupees. The Tribunal, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o note that this petition is not filed recently. The petition was filed as far back as in March 2001. In the first place, the condition imposed by the appellate Tribunal in the stay order dated 20-6-1997 was certainly unduly harsh. When the petitioner's balance sheet showed turnover of over Rs. 2 crores, obviously, the net surplus remaining with the petitioner after paying for raw materials, fuel, electricity, labour charges, etc. and after paying interest and taxes would be comparatively much less. Hence, the order for pre-deposit of a huge sum of Rs. 1 crore was certainly unduly harsh and completely crippled the petitioner. The petitioner did not get any reasonable opportunity to get its grievance redressed on merits. The very fact that s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d consider the petitioner's submission whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of judgment of the Tribunal rendered on 25-9-2000 as confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 19-4-2006. 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 20-6-1997 on the stay application and the order dated 18-11-1997 dismissing the petitioner's appeal are hereby set aside. The petitioner's appeal (Appeal No. 913 of 1997 on the Register of the Tribunal at Mumbai) shall stand restored to the file of the Appellate Tribunal and shall be heard by the Appellate Tribunal at Ahmedabad on merits without any condition about pre-deposit of the amount of duty or penalty demanded by the Order-in-Original. The Tribunal shall hear and decide the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates