High CourtsDivision Bench

Regional Manager vs Commr. of C.E. and S.T.

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 26 September 2013 · Citation: (2014) 35 STR 319

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dilip B. Bhosale, J · B. Manohar, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 39976 of 2013(CESTAT)
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

9 paragraphs · 423 words

Dilip B. Bhosale, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 11-7-2013 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal on Stay Application No. 133/2012 in Service Tax Appeal No. 251/2012.

2.

It appears that the petitioner sought waiver of pre-deposit and stay of further proceedings for recovery of the adjudicated liability, vide order dated 31-10-2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Guntur.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner after inviting out attention to Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, (for short ''the Act'') on instructions, submits that the petitioner shall deposit the entire amount due demanded as provided for u/s 35F of the Act, within a period of 8 weeks from today.

4.

The Appellate Tribunal, while disposing of the application seeking waiver in the concluding paragraph observed as follows:

"The petitioner shall remit the entirety of the assessed liability (after taking credit for amounts already deposited), within eight weeks from today and report compliance by 30-9-2013. In default of deposit or in reporting compliance as ordered, the appeal shall stand dismissed for failure of pre-deposit. Ld. counsel for the petitioner is present in the Court and has noted this order. This constitutes sufficient intimation to the petitioner of its obligation under this order. This application is disposed of accordingly."

5.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, in all fairness and in the light of the provisions contained in Section 35F of the Act submits that the prayer of the petitioner may be granted with a direction to the Appellate Tribunal to hear the appeal and decide it on merits.

6.

Keeping in view the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and considering the provisions contained in Section 35F of the Act, and so also the fact that the petitioner is a statutory body functioning under the Administrative control of the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industries, we are satisfied that the following order shall meet the ends of justice:

The petitioner shall deposit the entire amount due demanded within a period of eight weeks from today. Failing which, their appeal shall stands dismissed for non-prosecution. If the amount as aforementioned is deposited within the extended time, the Appellate Tribunal shall decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

7.

All contentions on merits are kept open. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the merits of the case.