THE KRUSHAK SEVA SAHAYYA SAMITI TRUST vs. THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS

{1} drp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.9 OF 2012 The Krushak Seva Sahayya Samiti Trust APPELLANT Shrishivjinagar, Post­Rahuri Factory Taluka­Rahuri, Dist­Ahmednagar VERSUS The Commissioner,

RESPONDENT Central Excise & Customs, N­5, Town Center, CIDCO, Aurangabad 431 003 ....... Mr. Abhay Kolte, Advocate for the appellant Mr. Alok Sharma, ASG for the respondent ....... [CORAM : R

. M. BORDE

AND

T. V

. NALAWADE

, J.J.

] DATE : 20

th   FEBRUARY 2013

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER R.M.BORDE, J.): 1. Heard. Admit. With the consent of respective counsel for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final disposal. 2. The   substantial   question   of   law,   which   is involved in the instant appeal is ­ "As to whether the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing

{2} the   appeal   presented   by   the   appellant   is   legal   and proper and whether there is prima facie case, balance of convenience in favour of the appellant and whether irreparable loss would cause to the appellant if the order dismissing the appeal on account of failure to make pre­deposit is not set aside? 3. The appellant  herein  tendered  an  appeal to the   CESTATE   challenging   the   order   passed   by   the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer. While entertaining the appeal and at the stage of consideration of an application seeking stay to the order of recovery of service tax amount   along   with   the   interest   levied   thereon,   the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, by an   order   dated   18.04.2011   directed   the   appellant   to pre­deposit an amount of Rs.50 lakhs u/s 35F of the Central Excise Act r/w Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994, within 6 weeks from the date of the order. It was   further   recorded   that   in   the   event   of   due compliance, there shall be waiver of the pre­deposit and stay of the recovery in respect of penalty amount. The appellant failed to deposit the amount as such, the   appeal   was   taken   up   for   consideration   on

{3} 19.08.2011 and the same came to be dismissed for non compliance of section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 r/w section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. 4. The   counsel   appearing   for   the   appellant submits   that   out   of   the   total   amount   of   Rs.2.04 crores, the appellant has already paid an amount of Rs.1.36 Crores and the balance amount of service tax payable is around Rs.67 lakhs. It is urged that the order passed by the appellate Tribunal is unduly harsh and   the   appellate   Tribunal   ought   to   have   directed waiver of the condition in respect of pre­deposit of amount. 5. We have heard the arguments advanced by the respective   counsel   appearing   for   the   parties   and   we are of the considered opinion that the directions of the appellate Tribunal in respect of the pre­deposit of the amount need not be interfered with. The counsel appearing for the appellant, on instructions, states that   the   appellant   would   deposit   the   amount   as directed by the Appellate Tribunal within a specified period   and   the   Tribunal   be   directed   to   decide   the appeal on its own merits.

{4} 6. Considering   the   submissions   made   by   the appellant, we are of the view that the ends of justice would   be   met   if   sufficient   time   is   granted   to   the appellant to comply with the directions issued by the appellate Tribunal on 18.04.2011. The appellant shall deposit an amount of Rs.50 lakhs with the Commissioner of   Central   Excise,   Aurangabad   within   a   period   three months from today. Subject of making the deposit of the amount, as directed above, the order passed by the appellate   Tribunal   on   19.08.2011   stands   quashed   and set aside. The Tribunal shall take up the appeal for consideration subject to compliance in respect of pre­ deposit of the amount within the time stipulated above and   decide   the   same   on   its   own   merits   and   in accordance   with   the   law,   expeditiously.   Appeal   is allowed accordingly. No costs. Sd/­ sd/­ [T.V.NALAWADE, J.]

[R.M.BORDE, J.] drp/A12/cea9­12