75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

July 2016

2016 (42) STR 425( Ori.) Maa Engineering vs. Registrar, CESTAT, Kolkata.

By Puloma Dalal
Jayesh Gogri
Mandar Telang
Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Court can reduce the amount of pre-deposit as directed by the Tribunal on the grounds of financial difficulties of the assessee and direct them to pay pre-deposit equal to mandatory percentage as prescribed in section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 even for appeals filed during the year 2012

Facts
The petitioner had filed appeals before the CESTAT in the year 2012 wherein pre-deposit of 25% of tax amount was ordered. Due to financial hardship they were unable to comply with the directions and hence challenged the predeposit order before the High Court.

Held
Although the amended provisions of section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 are not retrospective yet the High Court exercised its writ jurisdiction and considering the financial difficulties of Appellant to obtain statutory remedy, directed to make pre-deposit of 7.5% of the duty amount and passed the stay order till disposal.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

2016 (42) STR 420 (Del) CHL Limited vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi.

2016 (42) STR 668 (Mad.) Classic Builders (Madras) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CESTAT, Chennai.