High CourtsSingle Bench

Bhari Metal Fabrication Pvt. Ltd. vs Cestat, Chennai

Madras High Court · Decided on 5 November 2009 · Citation: (2012) 27 STR 209 : (2012) 37 STT 791

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. Chandru, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 22592 of 2009 and M.P. No. 1 of 2009
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

16 paragraphs · 336 words

K. Chandra, J.—The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition challenging the order dated 23-9-2009 passed by the Customs Excise

and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short ''CESTAT'') 2010 (17) S.T.R. 479 The petitioner filed an appeal. Pending the appeal, the petitioner

sought for stay in Application No. 855/2009. Though the Tribunal has discretion to waive the pre-deposit, in the given circumstances, in the

present case, the Tribunal imposed a condition of pre-deposit of Rs. 55,000/- within four weeks and on such deposit, pre-deposit of the balance

tax and interest shall stand waived and recovery shall stand stayed. It is this order, which is under challenge.

2.

Though the Tribunal is constituted for hearing the appeal and also clothed with the power for grant of interim order on condition including

waiver, of pre-deposit and the statutory Tribunal has passed a conditional order, which is purely discretionary and subject to the outcome of the

appeal, this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot interfere with the discretion exercised by the said Tribunal. Though the

learned counsel argued that in the other case the Tribunal has granted interim orders and this Court also granted interim orders, it must be noted

that there is no precedent in the matter of grant of interim orders. It is not as if the amount were being forfeited by the Revenue and on the contrary,

the deposit is subject to the outcome of the appeal.

3.

Under the circumstances, this court is not inclined to interfere with the interim order passed by the Tribunal. Hence, the Writ Petition stands

dismissed. No costs. The connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed. After the disposal of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the

petitioner informed that the time granted by the Tribunal for pre-deposit is expired. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the

petitioner is given four more weeks to comply with the interim order passed by the Tribunal, failing which the interim order passed by the Tribunal

will stand restored.