Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (10) TMI 485

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... total disputed demand, before the appellate authority. The petitioners have not deposited this statutory deposit, which is mandatory demand as per Section 35F of the aforesaid Act. This writ petition is totally misconceived for various reasons. Firstly, there is a statutory remedy available to the petitioners under Section 35B read with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and secondly, the petitioners have already availed this remedy. However, they have to deposit a statutory demand of 7.5% before the appellate authority before the matter could be heard. The petitioners in order to escape from this statutory liability of depositing of 7.5% of the demand amount have filed this writ petition. This is not permissible. Petition di .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fore the appellate authority. The petitioners have not deposited this statutory deposit, which is mandatory demand as per Section 35F of the aforesaid Act. 4. Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 reads as under:- Section 35F. Deposit of certain percentage of duty demanded or penalty imposed before filing appeal.- The Tribunal or the Commissioner (Appeals), as the case may be, shall not entertain any appeal,- (i) under sub-section (1) of Section 35, unless the appellant has deposited seven and a half per cent. of the duty in case where duty or duty and penalty are in dispute, or penalty, where such penalty is in dispute, in pursuance of a decision or an order passed by an officer of Central Excise lower .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y has not applied its judicial mind while deciding the case of the petitioners. There are various other grounds for challenge such as documentary evidences have not been taken into consideration, etc. 6. All the same, this writ petition is totally misconceived for various reasons. Firstly, there is a statutory remedy available to the petitioners under Section 35B read with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and secondly, the petitioners have already availed this remedy. However, they have to deposit a statutory demand of 7.5% before the appellate authority before the matter could be heard. The petitioners in order to escape from this statutory liability of depositing of 7.5% of the demand amount have filed this writ petit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates