Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 370 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2015 (11) TMI 370 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - Waiver of pre deposit - Mandatory pre deposit - Held that:- This is an appeal filed after 6.8.2014 after the amendment of Section 35F. After the amendment of Section 35F, any appeal filed the Tribunal shall not entertain any appeal unless appellant deposits 7.5% of the duty. - Tribunal in their own case ordered predeposit in an identical issue. Therefore, appellants have not made out a prima facie case for waiver of predeposit as the Tribunal vide order .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

P.K. Choudhary, Judicial Member For the Petitioner : Shri Kurian Thomas, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri R. Subramanian, AC (AR) ORDER Per R. Periasami The present appeals are filed on 8.4.2015. The appeals were filed after amendment to Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, w.e.f. 6.8.2014 without complying predeposit. Registry issued a defect memo for non-compliance of predeposit of 7.5% as per the amended provision. The DM was listed before Single Member on 26.6.2015 for admitting the appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on relied the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Muthoot Finance Ltd. Vs UOI 2015-TIOL-632-HC-KERALA-ST and the Madras High Court decision in the case of Dy. Commercial Tax Officer, Tirupur Central I Assessment Circle and others Vs Cameo Exports and Others reported in 2006 (147) STC 280 (Mad.) wherein it has been held that the relevant date is the date of initiation of assessment of proceedings and not the decision itself and submits that the Hon'ble High Court held that amended pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

demand in respect of various services, the Tribunal directed the very same appellant to deposit ₹ 20 lakhs in relation to transportation of goods from Regional Distribution Centres to Retail outlets. He further submits that in the present case, the transportation amount is ₹ 2.5 lakhs. He also submits that the total credit distributed by ISD challan wise and also there is no dispute on the manner of distribution of credit as the credit was as per rule 7. of service tax attributable u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d. He relied High Court's decision in the case of Arjun Industries Ltd. Vs CC Jaipur - 2015 (320) ELT 497 (Raj.) wherein the High Court said that mandatory predeposit of 7.5% or 10% as prescribed in Section 35F is applicable in cases of appeals filed prior to 6.8.2014. 4. After hearing both sides and after examining the merits of the stay applications, we find that this is an appeal filed after 6.8.2014 after the amendment of Section 35F. After the amendment of Section 35F, any appeal filed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

urt of Kerala at Ernakulam in WP(C).No.6173/15 (V) dated 02.03.2015 in M/s. Muthoot Finance Limited ..vs.. Union of India and another = 2015-TIOL-632-HC-KERALA-ST, which reads as follows:- "4. .. The only point that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner would have to deposit the amount of 7.5% of the tax confirmed against him, as a condition for pursuing the appellate remedy before the Tribunal. I note in this connection that recently, a Division Bench of the High Court of Tele .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o.3393/2015, the view seems to be consistent with the settled law that the institution of a suit carries with it an implication that all rights of appeal then in force are preserved to the parties thereto till the rest of the career of the suit and, further, that the right of appeal that is vested is to be governed by the law prevailing at the date of institution of the suit or proceeding, and not by the law that prevails at the date of its decision or at the date of filing of the appeal. (See: .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rsuant to the 2014 amendment, and in that respect, he would have an efficacious alternate remedy before the Tribunal where he can file an appeal, together with an application for waiver of pre-deposit and stay or recovery of the amounts confirmed against him by Ext.P8 order. At the time of filing the appeal, he will not be required to make any payment as a pre-condition for the hearing of the waiver application by the Tribunal. I, therefore, relegate the petitioner to the alternate remedy availa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

miss the writ petition in its challenge against Ext.P8 order. I make it clear that, if the petitioner prefers a duly constituted appeal under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994, as they stood prior to 16.08.2014, then the Appellate Tribunal shall number the Appeal, and consider the application filed by the petitioner for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the amounts confirmed against him by Ext.P8 order, on merits and thereafter, proceed to hear the appeal itself in due course. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

neral Sales Tax Act, 1959, against the orders of assessment, but the Appeals were rejected by the appellate authority on the ground that they were not accompanied by the proof of payment of 25% of the disputed tax as per proviso 2 to Section 31 of the Act as amended by Act 19 of 2002 with effect from June 3, 2002. The assessees filed Writ Petitions challenging that order. A single Judge allowed certain Writ Petitions without insisting upon the pre-deposit of 25% of the disputed tax, while the wr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sted in an assessee on the date when the order of final assessment was made under Section 12(2) of the Act or the order of reassessment was made under Section 16 of the Act, and, in any case, on the date when a notice of final assessment was issued under Section 12(2) or a show cause notice for reassessment was made under Section 16 of the Act. In that background, this Court has held that for the purpose of accrual of the right of appeal, the crucial and the relevant date is the date of initiati .....

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