9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30th October, 2014. The orders, which are annexed as Exhibits 'D' and 'G', are thus challenged on several grounds. 2. It is urged that firstly the Appellate Authority had before it not only an application for stay filed by the Petitioner, but the substantive Appeal itself. The same set of arguments were being canvased by both sides on the stay application as well as the Appeal. The Appellate Authority would have been well advised in taking up the Appeal and not the stay application. Assuming that course was permissible in law and it was permissible to decide the stay application, the Appellate Authority lost sight of the fact that the Petitioner is a manufacture of compact conductors, gap conductors, aluminium conductors et ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner's Counsel, therefore, submits that, apprehending coercive measures, an application for stay was made, on which, an order was passed on 5th April, 2014, thereby directing deposit of the entire sum demanded in terms of the assessment order. 4. Aggrieved by this order, the Petitioner filed an Appeal being VAT Appeal No. 355 of 2014 and which was partially allowed reducing the sum to Rs. 50,96,660/-. By this order, the Petitioner was aggrieved as the contention going to the root of the case has not been dealt with. Hence, it preferred the Rectification Application. The rejection of the Rectification Application is therefore vitiated by error of law apparent on the face of record. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le, then, it was necessary for the Petitioner to have produced Form 'F'. If that requirement was not prima facie complied with, then, it was incumbent on the Petitioner to satisfy the first appellate authority that the goods have been imported for use as raw materials at Silvasa factory. That document would indicate that some processing thereon was required to be undertaken, therefore these goods have been handed over to the distinct party and on instructions of the factory. It was not therefore a import for the Mumbai office. In these circumstances and until that opportunity has been availed of, the appellate authority found that the dues or the amount due to the Revenue ought to be secured. 7. We do not find any reason to interfe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition of pre-deposit and stay. The Appeal was not disposed of on merits. The Court has rendered only prima facie observations as is clear from paragraphs 12 and 13 of that order. 9. Similarly, the order passed by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Crystal Cable Industries Ltd. (supra) will not assist the Petitioner. There as well the argument noted was that there was alternate and equal efficacious remedy of Appeal. The Court found that the term or expression "every order passed in Appeal by the Appellate Tribunal" is qualified by a rider, that is, satisfaction of the High Court that the case involves a substantial question of law. Therefore the Appeal is not automatic. Hence, it was not termed to be a remedy which was efficacious as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
