TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1002X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated that the products of the Appellant are obliged to be sold by L & T Limited at such price as it may fix and that L & T shall endeavour to foster the interests and trade of the Appellant and will not directly or indirectly be concerned or engaged in any business of the same nature as that of the Appellant. In effect, L & T Limited is a sole selling agent of the Appellant. Until 1 July 2006, as a matter of fact, the Appellant was paying the duty of central excise on the selling price of L & T Limited. - The Tribunal has observed that the submissions addressed by the Appellant would require consideration. This is indicative of the fact that the matter requires deliberation. - Therefore, while a complete waiver is not warranted, in order to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s barred by limitation but the second show cause notice was within limitation. The Tribunal has called upon the Appellant to deposit an amount of ₹ 1.80 crores within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order and report compliance on 10 January 2013, on compliance of which there would be a stay against the recovery of the balance amount of duty, interest and penalties till the disposal of the appeals. 3. There is no dispute before the Court that prior to 1 July 2006 the Appellant was paying central excise duty on the goods purchased by Larsen Toubro Limited (`L T Ltd.') with reference to the selling price of the latter. From 1 July 2006, the Appellant changed the pattern of assessment and started paying the duty li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner has held that there was mutuality of interest between the businesses of the two companies on the basis of circumstances which are indicated in the order of the Commissioner. On this ground it is urged that the prayer for complete waiver has not been made out. 6. We have for the purposes of this appeal formulated the following substantial question of law : (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in directing a pre-deposit of an amount of ₹ 1.80 crores of a total duty demand of ₹ 3.64 crores having come to the conclusion that the issues raised by the Appellant are debatable and need to be addressed in depth at the time of regular hear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In the present case, we have perused the order of the Commissioner. Prima facie, at this stage, it appears from a reading of the order that the Commissioner has not founded the order only upon the circumstance that 50% of the share holding in the Appellant is held by L T Limited. The order of the Commissioner indicates that several other circumstances of a factual nature have been relied upon including among them the fact that L T Limited bears the salaries and other expenses of officers and directors of the Appellant, that under the selling agency agreement it has been stipulated that the products of the Appellant are obliged to be sold by L T Limited at such price as it may fix and that L T shall endeavour to foster the interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Tribunal would have to be suitably modified. 11. In the circumstances, instead and in place of the direction of the Tribunal, we order that the quantum of pre-deposit shall be modified from 50% (Rs.1.80 crores) to 25% (Rs.90.00 lakhs). Time for effecting compliance shall stand extended by a further period of four weeks from today. In view of the disposal of the appeal, the question of law as framed, shall stand answered in terms of the aforesaid directions. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. We make it clear that all observations contained in the order are made for the purposes of the disposal of the appeal and shall not come in the way of a determination of all the rival submissions on merits by the Tribunal. - - Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
