9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1944 (the Act) for the purposes of hearing the Petitioner's appeal on merits against the order dated 30.03.2012 of the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I. 2. The brief facts are as follows: a) The Petitioner is engaged in manufacturing of Mobile Steam Generator and Bath Heater Assembly (said goods) falling under Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The petitioner interalia sells its said goods to M/s. Oil India Limited at Nil rate of duty availing the benefit of notification no.6/2006 dated 01.03.2006. b) On 08.04.2011, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner in respect of said goods sold to M/s. Oil India Ltd. to show cause why an amount of Rs.34.94 lacs shoul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the petitioner submitted that they have a strong prima facie case for dispensing with pre-deposit of duty and penalty completely. The petitioner pointed out that the said goods supplied to M/s. Oil India Limited are exempted from the payment of custom duty under notification no. 21/02-Cus dated 01.03.2002 and also under International Competitive Bidding. In support reliance was placed upon the Project Authority Certificates issued by M/s. Oil India Ltd. from time to time. f) The Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Pune-I by an order dated 18.10.2012 after recording the petitioner's above submission merely states that the petitioner have not made out any prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit of duty, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er all the submissions made by the parties in depth. However, as he would be exercising a quasijudicial function while directing the petitioner to deposit or not deposit any amount for the purposes of entertaining the petitioner's appeal on merit, the same is required to be exercised by showing that he has at least prima facie considered the submissions of the parties before him. Merely because the petitioner has not pleaded any financial hardship, it would not follow that the amount of duty and/or penalty adjudicated by the lower authority has to be pre-deposited for the purposes of hearing of the appeal on merits. A strong prima facie case may at times constitute sufficient reason for dispensing with pre-deposit of any amount for the purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
