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

2015 (12) TMI 1208 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

2015 (12) TMI 1208 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT - 2015 (326) E.L.T. 490 (Raj.) - Waiver of pre deposit - Section 35F - Held that:- One after the other three successive writ petitions were preferred by petitioner before the High Court of Delhi assailing the orders passed by the CESTAT and this fact cannot be ruled out that petitioner-company remained sick for a long time and became viable and started commercial production in February, 2015 and so also the fact that right of appeal which has been provid .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ct within a period of thirty days from today, the appeal which was filed before the CESTAT deserves to be restored and heard on merits. - petition is disposed of with the direction that if the petitioner now complies with the condition of pre-deposit in terms of the order of CESTAT dt.27.04.2006 on his application filed u/Sec.35F of the Act, be restored and the same be heard on merits. - Decided in favor of assessee. - D.B.Civil Writ Petition No.27/2009. - Dated:- 5-8-2015 - MR. AJAY RASTOGI AND .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l production of Caustic Soda in the year 1994-95 through Hydrogen Gas which earlier emerged during the production of Caustic Soda which could be used in the edible products like in solvex plants. It has been alleged in the petition that petitioner-Company was declared sick by BIFR vide order dt.15.01.2002. The scheme of its rehabilitation with reliefs and concession was sanctioned on 30.11.2006 by BIFR and during pendency of the writ petition on 26.03.2010 on company's net worth becoming via .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.2005 came to be issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Alwar for recovery of duty and imposition of penalty and after affording opportunity of hearing, the adjudicating authority vide its order dt.27.06.2005 confirmed the Excise Duty of ₹ 12,63,598/- along with the penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/-. The petitioner-Company being aggrieved by the order, in original, filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) which came to be rejected vide order dt.08.12.2005 and that came to b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eposit 50% of the duty and penalty within six weeks to entertain the appeal before 21.06.2006 failing which the appeal before the CESTAT will stand dismissed. 5. In all fairness, counsel for the petitioner submits that the jurisdiction to question the order of CESTAT lies before the Rajasthan High Court but on the ill advise extended to the petitioner, the order dt.27.04.2006 came to be challenged by filing of Writ Petition No.10553/2006 before the High Court of Delhi but before there could be a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. 6. Since the appeal came to be dismissed by the CESTAT because of non-compliance of the order dt.27.04.2006 on the last date of its compliance i.e. on 21.06.2006 and the earlier writ petition also came to be dismissed, the petitioner was advised to file a fresh writ petition before the High Court of Delhi being Writ Petition No.1097/2007 and that came to be dismissed as withdrawn on 13.03.2007 in view of the fact that question of law raised before the High Court of Delhi has already been raise .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CWP No.7075/2007 and when that writ petition came up for hearing before the High Court of Delhi, objection was raised that in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in Ambica Industries Vs. CCE reported in 2007 (213) ELT 323 (SC), jurisdiction lies with the Rajasthan High Court. Taking note thereof,the petitioner withdrew the writ petition with leave to approach the appropriate jurisdictional High Court and that liberty was granted to petitioner by the High Court of Delhi while dismissing the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t of Rajasthan. Counsel further submits that petitioner-company was a sick company for a long time and it has become viable in the recent past and started commercial production from February, 2015 and right of appeal is a statutory right provided under the Act has been denied to him only for the reason that he has failed to comply with the condition of pre-deposit in terms of order dt.27.04.2006 passed by the CESTAT and further submits that the statutory right of appeal, is not dependent upon co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; Customs [Civil Appeal No.10265/2014 - arising out of SLP (C) No.8738/2014] and submits that without going into merits the question which he has been raised in the instant petition, he has instructions from his client to inform that since the petitioner-company has now become viable and started commercial production, he needs liberty of this court that on complying with the conditions of pre-deposit in terms of order of CESTAT dt.27.04.2006, the appeal which he has preferred before CESTAT at le .....

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