JAIN SHUDH VANASPATI LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of learned counsel on either side we proceed to dispose of this matter finally.

(2.) This appeal is directed against an order dated 23/05/1983 by which interim stay granted in this case as well as in connected cases was vacated. To all intents and purposes this is thus an appeal against the refusal of interim relief by the High court.

(3.) Mr S. S. Ray, learned counsel for the appellant contended that in identical matters interim stay has been granted on condition of the appellant furnishing bank guarantee for the amount involved in the dispute. Mr K. G. Bhagat, Additional Solicitor-General for the respondent pointed out that in another matter involving the same point this court has vacated interim stay on condition that if the appellant succeeds in the case Union of India will refund the amount with interest at 18 per cent p. a. Having heard them and keeping in view the emphasis on precedent that this court should follow its earlier orders, we fail to see how this bank guarantee helps either side. Mr Ray said that commission to the tune of Rs. 25 lacs had to be paid to the bank for giving guarantee. If this amount had been paid to revenue without prejudice to the contention in the event of success of the appellant it could have been refunded with interest. Bank guarantee neither helps the revenue nor the assessee only banks reap the benefit. This trend in appropriate case is required to be reversed. Accordingly we are of the opinion that the appellant shall pay within six months from today 50 per cent of the disputed duty and shall furnish bank guarantee for the balance of 50 per cent of the disputed duty.