Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Herbal House Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal

2016 (8) TMI 439 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Whether there is a case for modification of Final Order dated 28.11.2014 of the Tribunal ordering for pre-deposit of ₹ 7,50,000/- for admission of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) or not - Availability of amended provisions of Section 35F introduced w.e.f. 6.8.2014 - Held that:- the amended provisions of Section 35F has come into force only we.f. 6.8.2014 but the impugned order was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on 26.03.2014 and the appeal before the Tribunal was filed on 4. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

footing as Section 129E of the Customs Act. - Decided against the appellant - Excise Appeal No. 50471/2015-EX(DB), Appeal No. E/53641/2014-EX(DB) - Dated:- 19-2-2016 - S K Mohanty, Member (J) And B Ravichandran, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri Vector Das, Adv For the Respondent : Shri Govind Dixit, DR ORDER Per B Ravichandran This misc. application is filed by the appellant consequent on the directions of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court vide their order dated 9.1.2015. The sequenc .....

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 appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide Stay Order dated 19.02.2014 ordered for pre-deposit of the entire duty. However, the penalty was waived for pre-deposit. On 26.3.2014, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal for non-compliance of the above mentioned order for pre-deposit. The applicant filed appeal before the Tribunal on 4.7.2014 along with application for stay. The Tribunal vide Final Order No.54619/2014 dated 28.11.2014 decided both the appeals and petition for stay. The 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

der. The Hon'ble High Court observed that the petitioner claims the applicability of amendment carried out w.e.f. 6.8.2014 in Section 35 F of Central Excise Act, which deals with a deposit of duty or penalty before filing the appeal. 3. The present misc. application was filed in the above mentioned background. 4. Ld. Counsel for the applicant submitted that though the appeal was filed prior to the introduction of the amended provisions, the benefit of 7.5% pre-deposit as applicable in terms .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ppeals filed after the said amendment. The matter has been examined in detail by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Ganesh Yadav Vs. Union of India - 2015 (320) ELT 711 (Allahabad) and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Anjani Technoplast Ltd. - 2015 (326) ELT 472 (Delhi). 6. We have heard both the sides. 7. The only point for decision is whether or not there is a case for modification of Final Order dated 28.11.2014 of the Tribunal ordering for pre-deposit of ₹ 7,50,000/- for admiss .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he prima facie merits of the applicant's view on the dispute. It was held that out of the total demand, an amount of ₹ 27 Lakhs relating to classification of "Brahmi Amla Hair Oil" is covered by the Tribunal's decision in Gurukul Kangri Pharmacy - 2006 (198) ELT 259 (Tribunal-Delhi). Out of the remaining tax due of ₹ 15,00,000/- , ₹ 7.5 Lakhs was ordered to be deposited. It was also recorded that the appellant indicated their readiness to deposit this amount. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the applicant with reference to the directions of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court. Regarding the application of amended Section 35 F, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad and the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi had occasion to examine the provisions in detail. In Ganesh Yadav (supra), the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court after examining the various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the legal principles, concluded as below:- "20. The intendment of Section 35F of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version