TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AX REVISION No. - 71 of 2016, TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 72 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 30-5-2016 - Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J. For the Applicant : Hairdaya Narain Tiwari,Hari Mangal Singh For the Respondent : C.S.C. ORDER Notice on behalf of opposite parties has been accepted by learned Chief Standing Counsel. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel and perused the records. These are two Trade Tax Revisions arising out of common order, as such, they have been clubbed together and are now being decided together by a common order. The impugned order has been passed rejecting the second appeal by the learned Trade Tax Tribunal upholding the order passed by First Appellate Court, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issions made by parties' counsel and gone through the records. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of I.T.C. Ltd. vs. Commissioner (Appeals), Custom Central Excise, Meerut-I 2005 (184) E.L.T. 347 (ALL.), (paragraph no.35) held as under:- In view of the above, the aforesaid authorities make it clear that the Court should not grant interim relief/stay of the recovery merely by asking of a party. It has to maintain a balance between the rights of an individual and the State so far as the recovery of sovereign dues is concerned. While considering the application for stay/waiver of a pre-deposit, as required under the law, the Court must apply its mind as to whether the appellant has a strong prima facie case on merit. In ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly, the interest of the Revenue cannot be jeopardized but that does not mean that in order to protect the interest of the Revenue, the Court or authority should exercise its duty under the law to take into consideration the rights and interest of an individual. It is also clear that before any goods could be subjected to duty, it has to be established that it has been manufactured and it is marketable and to prove that it is marketable, the burden is on the Revenue and not on the manufacture. In Kribhco Shyam Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Lucknow 2009 NTN (Vol. 40) - 67 this Court while dealing with the prima facie merits of the case under U.P. Tax on Entry of Goods in the Local Area Act, 2007 where the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
