2023 (5) TMI 862 - HC - Central Excise

Seeking waiver of requisite pre-deposit in terms of Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act 1944 - financial hardship - HELD THAT:- The reason assigned in the writ petition is only of financial crises during Covid-19 Pandemic period. Documents like balance sheet filed along with the petition would show that the petitioner is in profit after the Covid -19 Pandemic period.

In the case of Ganesh Yadav Vs. U.O.I, [2015 (7) TMI 304 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] it was held that the Allahabad High Court held that the words in the amended Section 35F indicated that on and after the date of its enforcement an Assessee in appeal was required to deposit the stipulated percentage of duty and if it failed to do so, the CESTAT shall not entertain the appeal. The amended Section 35A would, therefore, apply to all appeals filed on and from the date of the enforcement of the amended Section 35F of the CE Act.

The prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner of waiver of mandatory pre-deposit cannot be accepted and, therefore, the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is rejected.

However, considering the alternate prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner for extension of time for depositing the amount of pre-deposit before the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal is concerned, though in this petition only the notice/information of defect is put to challenge and no subsequent order is placed on record, considering the submission of learned counsel for petitioner of facing difficulties during Covid-19 Pandemic period, with a view to provide an opportunity to contest the appeal on merits, the alternate prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed and the time for mandatory deposit is extended - Accordingly, three months further time is granted to the petitioner to deposit the amount of mandatory pre-deposit before the Tribunal, from the date of passing of this order.

Petition disposed off.