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

2016 (7) TMI 293 - CESTAT BANGALORE

2016 (7) TMI 293 - CESTAT BANGALORE - TMI - Restoration of appeal - appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of pre-deposit order - appellant wants to start manufacturing plywoods in full scale but the respondent would not allow them as duty and penalty are due to them. - it also submitted that appellant has a very good case on merits and there is every chance of succeeding in the appeal. - fter considering the submissions of both the parties and after going through the judgments cited above 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

to above conditions. - E/ROA/20165-20167/2015 in E/543-545/2006-DB - Stay Order/Misc Order No:20225-20227/2016 - Dated:- 8-6-2016 - S.S Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member Ms Nisha Bineesh, Adv - For the Appellant Mr. N. Jaadish, A.R. - For the Respondent ORDER The appellant/applicant has filed an application seeking restoration of appeals which were dismissed for non-compliance by this Tribunal vide its order dated 07.02.2007. The applicant has averred in the applica .....

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 May 2003. The respondent has alleged evasion of excise duty by the appellant by under valuation of the decorative plywood and veneers manufactured and sold through direct billing and also by clandestine clearance. The Revenue Intelligence of the Respondent immediately after the present management took over the company but before they started the work conducted search operations at their premises, branch offices, distributors, dealers and at various residences of the executive directors and for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Excise Rules and also imposed equal penalty under Section 11AC on the 1st Appellant and seized the decorative plywood valued at ₹ 91,50,211/- with option to redeem them for a fine of ₹ 4,00,000/-. Thereafter the appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its stay order No 1175-1179/2006 dated 27.10.2006 directed the appellant to predeposit an amount of ₹ 30,00,000/-. The plea of financial hardship was not considered and the huge amount was imposed on 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

proceedings against the appellant which has become defunct ever since it was taken over by the present directors and the appellant could not even pay the salaries to its staff. There is absolutely no income from the factory for more than a decade. The appellant secured loan from the Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai for an amount of ₹ 2 crores against hypothecation of appellant s property by way of security and the appellant due to loss in business committed default in making repayment and 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

very good case on merits and there is every chance of succeeding in the appeal. She further submitted that the amount confirmed against the appellants were not wholly payable by them. She also submitted that there is series of decisions of the Apex Court which held that appeal would not be dismissed for want of predeposit but only on merits. She also submitted that the appellants are now ready to comply with the direction of the Tribunal directing the appellant to predeposit a sum of ₹ 30, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e cannot be restored even after making the deposit and the only remedy available to the appellant is to file an appeal before a Higher Forum. He also submitted that if the appeal is restored it would tantamount to review of the order of the Tribunal which is not permitted under law. In support of his submission he relied upon the following authorities: 1) Parwati Automotives Pvt Ltd Vs CCE Kanpur [2011(264)ELT 522(Tri-Del)] 2) Singla Steels Pvt Ltd Vs CCE Chandigarh [2010(256)ELT 110 (Tri-Del)] .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

estion need not to be decided. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal could have rendered substantial justice by giving an opportunity to the appellant as the appellant had furnished the demand draft in the sum of ₹ 10,00,000/- to the Commissioner of Customs (Imports, JNPT, Nava Sheva) Taluka Uran, District Raigad on 24th July,2014. By imposing suitable conditions, the appellants appeal could have been restored to file for disposal on merits in accordance with law. We propose to adopt su .....

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