Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be fully migrated on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
After this date, all services will be available exclusively on our new platform.
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Home
1996 (2) TMI 151 - HC - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Petition for quashing order of Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. 2. Consideration of financial position for waiver of excise duty pre-deposit. 3. Allegations of defective forgings and transfer without permission. Detailed Analysis: 1. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, which rejected the petitioner's application for waiver in part. The dispute arose from a demand of excise duty of Rs. 2,86,036 imposed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, which was challenged by the petitioner before the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1 lac instead of the full amount under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 2. The petitioner contended that the impugned order did not consider the balance-sheet of the company and failed to acknowledge the petitioner's financial constraints. However, the court found no merit in these arguments. The court observed that the petitioner did not provide substantial evidence to support their claim of financial hardship. The balance-sheet as of March 31, 1995, did not conclusively prove the inability to pay the required deposit. The court noted the petitioner's stock in trade and outstanding debtors, indicating potential liquidity. 3. The issue of defective forgings and their transfer without permission was also raised. The Tribunal had considered this aspect and concluded that it was a factual matter requiring evidence for resolution. The petitioner's argument that the forgings were treated as scrap was contested, alleging a violation of rules under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The court found no grounds to interfere with the Tribunal's decision, deeming it reasonable and based on judicial considerations. In conclusion, the court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the order of the Appellate Tribunal was justified. The petitioner was given two months to deposit the required amount, with the appeal to be decided thereafter.
|