Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (3) TMI 99 - AT - Central ExciseNon-compliance of Section 35F - Elevator versus Lift - Deposit 50% of the duty demanded within 4 weeks - There is no evidence placed on record by the appellants to show that all throughout, the unit was being used as freight elevator or as material handling equipment - neither the import of the passenger lift is covered by the Notification in question nor the passenger lift was established to be a freight elevator - The material on record was totally against such claim(the import of lift in question was covered by the Notification No.53/97-Cus)by the appellants - The show-cause notice was essentially to the effect that the lift is not covered by Notification in question - It was the case of the appellants themselves that though it is a passenger lift, it was being used as material handling equipment and therefore it is covered by the said Notification - The burden, therefore, in this case was specifically cast upon the appellants - There was no question of casting the burden upon the department to prove the negative. Held that: The Commissioner (Appeals) was justified for ordering pre-deposit of 50% of the duty and thereafter for dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance of the stay order - Hence in the absence of any infirmity in the impugned order, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
|