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

March 2015

2015-TIOL-193-CESTAT-MUM Kala Mines and Minerals vs. CC,CE & ST.

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri, Mandar telang Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Once the appeal is filed by paying pre-deposit amount of 7.5% of the tax demand in terms of section 35F of CEA, 1944 and appeal is pending before the Tribunal, there was no need for freezing the bank accounts

Facts:
The Appellant complied with the provisions of section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 while filing appeal. DGCEI wrote a letter to the bankers of the Appellant to remit the amounts lying with the bank to the Government exchequer, in pursuance to which, the bankers froze the bank accounts.

Held:
In our considered view and as also statutorily once mandatory deposit of 7.5% is made, there is no reason for recovery of any further amount from the appellant and the action of the Dy. Director, DGCEI seems to be beyond the scope of law.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

2015-TIOL-313-CESTAT-MUM M/s. Lamour Advertising Agency vs. CCE

2014 (36) STR 1054 (Tri. Del.) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Jaipur