TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 772X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pre-deposit of dues adjudged in view of the ratio of Division Bench of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case Triveni Castings (P) Ltd. cited (2011 (2) TMI 170 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT). Accordingly in view of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court and the various High Courts, and the interest of Revenue, and in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate to direct the pre-deposit of 50% by the Applicant pending disposal of the Appeal. - Partial stay granted. - Appeal No.Ex.Ap.70029/13 - ORDER NO.SO/75617/2014 - Dated:- 10-6-2014 - Dr. D. M. Misra and Dr. I.P. Lal, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri S. Misra, Addl. Commr.(A.R.) JUDGEMENT Per D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chines was found to be in operation in packing of chewing tobacco. During the said search, 64 number of pouches containing such goods were also found in the said manufacturing premises. Shri Himanshu Sekhar Sahoo, Prop. of the Applicant company in his statement dated 19.01.2011 admitted that he has started manufacture of impugned goods for last six months, but he neither obtained any central excise registration for manufacturing of the same nor paid any central excise duty for removal of such goods. Based on the investigation a show cause notice was issued and adjudicated by the impugned order which culminated into confirmation of demand and imposition of penalty as above. 3. Shri B. N. Chattopadhyay, Ld. Consultant appearing on behalf o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artment has unearthed that the Applicant was using the machines or producing the chewing tobacco, but neither they had declared the number of machines which were in use and lying with them in the declaration filed to the department nor discharged the duty. He invited attention to the statement of Shri Himanshu Sekhar Sahoo, Prop. wherein he categorically admitted about the production carried by them using the said machine and also about one of the machines lying idle at the time of visit of central excise officers to the premises of the Applicant company. Accordingly he submitted that the duty is rightly demanded from the Applicant company and the penalty imposed for non-payment of duty. 5. As regards the financial hardship it is submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. For these reasons, we are not able to sustain the impugned order inspite of the offer of the respondent (made through their Counsel) to deposit ₹ 5.00 Crores (Rupees five Crores only) as a precondition for continuing stay. 6. He has further submitted that the Apex Court in the case of Metal Box India Ltd. vs. CCE - 2003 (155) E.L.T. 13 (SC) has observed that after considering the provisions of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act, 1985, the court observed that the same is not applicable to deposits under Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. Accordingly the ld.A.R. prays that full waiver of pre-deposit cannot allowed as it would be detrimental to the interest of Revenue. 7. After hearing both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
