New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (5) TMI 837 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2015 (5) TMI 837 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT - 2015 (322) E.L.T. 349 (Guj.) - Stay application - Mandatory pre deposit - Section 35F - Held that:- During the pendency of proceedings or after the order passed by the adjudicating authority, if the law is amended and a condition of pre-deposit is also amended in Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, the appellant would have to comply with the provisions as the amended provisions would apply to all the appeals which are filed after coming into force of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gislature has granted benefit to the assessees by fixing pre-deposit equivalent to 7.5% or 10% of the confirmed amount of duty liability as per the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore, we do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. - Decided against Assessee. - Special Civil Application No. 4663 of 2015 - Dated:- 4-5-2015 - Vijay Manohar Sahai, ACJ And R. P. Dholaria,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr Hasit Dilip Dave, Adv. For the Responden .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ase of the petitioner without any predeposit. (B) Pending petition Your Lordships be pleased to stay the implementation of the impugned order dated 10.11.2014 (C) Ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of prayer B above may kindly be granted pending the admission and final disposal of the present petition." 2. By order dated 10.11.2014 passed by the Tribunal, West Zonal, Ahmedabad, rejected the appeal and stay application on the ground that after 8.9.2014 amendment has taken in Section 35F of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the appellant's appeal was not entertainable. Hence, the stay application and the appeal both were disposed of by the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal has been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition. 3. Though specified relief has not been claimed, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that amended Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, came into force from 6.8.2014 and in the appellant's case, the order was passed by the adjudicating authority on 30.5. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ommissioner (Appeals), as the case may be, shall not entertain any appeal - (i) under sub-section (1) of Section 35, unless the appellant has deposited seven and a half per cent of the duty, in case where duty or duty and penalty are in dispute, or penalty, where such penalty is in dispute, in pursuance of a decision or an order passed by an officer of Central Excise lower in rank than the (Principal Commissioner of Central Excise or Commissioner of Central Excise); (ii) against the decision or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n dispute, or penalty, where such penalty is in dispute, in pursuance of the decision or order appealed against; provided that the amount required to be deposited under this Section shall not exceed rupees ten crores; provided further that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the stay applications and appeals pending before any appellate authority prior to the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014. Explanation - For the purpose of this Section "duty demanded" hall .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version