Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2022 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 134 - HC - Central ExciseMaintainability of appeal - seeking waiver from making mandatory pre-deposit of 7.5% required to institute an appeal before the CESTAT - Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994 - It is contended that the huge quantum of pre-deposit due from the petitioner is too onerous and makes it practically impossible for the petitioner to pursue its statutory remedy - HELD THAT:- When the pre-deposit required for preferring the appeal in the instant case was ₹ 18,06,057/-, petitioner has already deposited ₹ 12,15,000/- and the balance is only ₹ 5,56,057/- which has not been deposited, since the petitioner claims to be in penury. A perusal of the statutory provisions will reveal that the amendment to section 35F of the Central Excise Act r/w Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994, clearly manifest the intention of the legislature that the waiver of pre-deposit, which was being resorted to, quite often by the courts of law, needed to be amended to make the pre-deposit mandatory. Thus, after the Amendment Act came into force, no discretion is available with the courts of law to waive the mandatory requirement of pre-deposit of 7.5% even if it is assumbed to be onerous in the circumstances of the case - When the Statute does not provide for waiver of a pre-deposit, it is impermissible for this Court to act contrary to the legislative intention merely on the plea of financial hardships. If such pleas are entertained, and directions are issued for waiving the pre-deposit, there will be no end to such demands. Further if orders are issued, contrary to the Statute the same will destroy the very scheme of the Statute including the consequent amendment. It is appropriate to refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in OIL & NATURAL GAS CORP. LTD. VERSUS GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPORATION. LTD. AND ORS. [2017 (3) TMI 1628 - SUPREME COURT], wherein it was observed that the High courts cannot disregard the statutory mandates. The writ petition is dismissed.
|