2013 (2) TMI 335

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant request for modification of the direction for pre-deposit was also considered by the appellate authority which rejected their plea of undue hardships for want of documentary evidence. The appellate authority appears to have, by and large, followed the principles of natural justice also. Nevertheless, for the ends of justice, one more opportunity to the appellant to make the requisite pre-depos .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation of a show-cause notice, the original authority had ordered for recovery of Rs. 78,040/- with interest thereon and had also imposed a penalty of Rs. 78,040/- on the assessee. Aggrieved, the party preferred an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) and also filed therein an application for waiver of pre-deposit of the adjudged dues. The appellate authority directed them to pre-deposit 50% of Rs. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pellant to pre-deposit 50% of the CENVAT credit amount. The appellant ought to have made the deposit to enable the appellate authority to dispose of their case on merits. It is also observed that their request for modification of the direction for pre-deposit was also considered by the appellate authority which rejected their plea of undue hardships for want of documentary evidence. The appellate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X