High CourtsDivision Bench

Accel Transmatic Ltd. vs C.C.E., C. and S.T.

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 28 January 2015 · Citation: (2015) 319 ELT 440

HON’BLE JUDGES
T.B. Radhakrishnan, J · K. Harilal, J
CASE NUMBER
C.E. Appeal No. 3 of 2015
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 239 words

T.B. Radhakrishnan, J.

1.

We heard the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Excise and Customs. This appeal is against an order by which the appellant is directed to pre-deposit the entire Customs duty of Rs. 33,73,237/- within the time limit fixed in the impugned order which is one issued during the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal.

2.

For reasons stated in its order, the Tribunal has categorically found that the appellant has not fulfilled the export obligation and the orders passed by the lower authorities cannot be found fault with. If such finding was available, the Tribunal could have considered ordering the appeal finally rather than insist on the appellant making a pre-deposit. We may also note the submission on behalf of the appellant that its plea regarding financial inabilities has not been addressed. On the whole, we think that it is appropriate that the Tribunal reconsiders the application for waiver of pre-deposit and also considers whether the appeal itself could be decided finally. Leaving all issues in that regard open, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal to that extent, paving way for the Tribunal to decide on all issues untrammeled by anything stated herein. The appellant is directed to mark appearance before the Tribunal on 27-2-2015. The Tribunal will consider expeditious disposal of the matter at that end. Appeal is allowed accordingly.