TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... % of the demand in case of an appeal, and 10% of the demand in case of second appeal, to make the remedy of appeal effective and to avoid the CESTAT to spend most of its time only in deciding matters of pre-deposit. - In the meantime, in case the appellant deposits 10% of the demand, excluding the demand of penalty, within a period of sixty days from today, after adjusting the amount of ₹ 5 lakh, which has been deposited, the recovery of the remaining amount shall remain stayed. - Decided conditionally in favour of assessee. - D.B. EXCISE APPEAL NOS. 2 & 26 OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 2-12-2014 - SUNIL AMBWANI AND J.K. RANKA, JJ For The Appellant : Ashok Mehta, Sr. Counsel and Devendra Sharma ORDER 1. D.B. Excise Appeal No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence available in the present case, as also the one which was before the Commissioner in the other case, was similar in nature. 2. The D.B. Excise Appeal No.26/2014, filed by the appellant, arises out of final order passed by the CESTAT, dated 26.05.2014, by which the appeal was dismissed on the ground that there was no compliance of the order of pre-deposit, dated 23.10.2012, and no proof of pre-deposit was filed. The substantive demand for excise duty, interest and penalties, assessed on 23.10.2012, stand unrealized and even 25% of the duty and ₹ 2 lakh as penalty, directed to be pre-deposited by the appellant and its Director on 23.10.2012, remained un-remitted. The appeal was thus dismissed by CESTAT on the ground of non-compli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur-I, Jaipur in the matter of M/s Shiv Prasad Mills Pvt. Ltd., in which the demand, worked out on the basis of electricity consumption, was dropped. He has also relied upon R.A. Castings (P.) Ltd. v. CCE 2009 (237) ELT 674, decided by the Tribunal at Delhi on the issue, which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CCE v. R.A. Casting (P.) Ltd. Ors. Etc.Etc., dismissing the Special Leave Petition on 31.01.2011. 7. The Tribunal at Delhi, held in R.A. Castings (P.) Ltd. (supra),that the excise duty based upon production on high consumption of electricity, cannot be the only factor for determining the liability. 8. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
