9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 528X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ks. 2. Challenging the said order, the appellant has filed this appeal and seeks admission on the following substantial questions of law : (i) Whether the order of the Tribunal is right in directing a pre-deposit of Rs. 13 lakhs for hearing the appeal, when the appellant is not liable to pay the Excise Duty as demanded by the respondent? (ii) Whether the order of the Tribunal directing a pre-deposit of Rs. 13 lakhs of the taxes stands vitiated inasmuch as it fails to see that the condition imposed is such, which for all intent and purport takes away the appellants vested right of appeal and works as a deterrent or disables and impedes access to a forum viz., CESTAT which is meant for r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng CENVAT Credit. Therefore, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has made out a prima facie case and the balance of convenience is in their favour and therefore sought for reduction in the pre-deposit amount as directed to be deposited by the Tribunal. 4. Learned Counsel for the appellant also place reliance on the order passed by the Tribunal dated 29-8-2012 in respect of another assessee, viz., Sam Turbo Industries Ltd., in Application No. E/S/62/2012 in E/138/2012 and submitted that the Tribunal has granted 100% waiver of pre-deposit in that case and therefore the appellant should also be granted relief in this appeal. 5. We have heard Mr. A.P. Srinivas, learned Standing Counsel appeari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erial has been placed by the appellant before the Tribunal to substantiate such claim. Furthermore, though the recovery was ordered for Rs. 25,48,085/- along with penalty equivalent to the said sum, the Tribunal directed pre-deposit for only a sum of Rs. 13,00,000/-. In such circumstances, we do not find any error in the manner in which the Tribunal has exercised its direction. 8. Insofar as the case relating to Sam Turbo Industries Ltd., it is to be noted that the order dated 29-8-2012 is an order under an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit, the same being an interim order cannot be cited as a precedent, in the light of the fact that it is a discretionary order. Furthermore, the facts of the said case are different and the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
