HIRA PACKAGING Vs. COMMISSIONER CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Counsel for the appellant and the respondent. The appellant assails order dated 24-1-2014 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal') in Excise Appeal No. 914 of 2012. The Tribunal, by the impugned order declined to interfere with its earlier order dated 10-7-2013 dismissing the appeal upon failure of the appellant to comply the interim order 7-9-2012 granting waiver of pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') to the extent of 50% only of the Excise duty assessed at Rs. 1,64,56,452/-.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that aggrieved by the classification of Tobacco Dust/Refuse mixed with lime combined with water packed in pouches and the consequent levy of Excise duty, it had preferred Appeal No. 565 of 2012. The aforesaid demand dated 27-12-2011 of Excise duty was based on this erroneous classification. The latter was challenged in Appeal No. 914 of 2012. On 29-8-2012, Appeal No. 565 of 2012 was directed to be heard along with Appeal No. 914 of 2012. The latter appeal alone was taken up for consideration on 7-9-2012 and orders passed under Section 35F for waiver of pre-deposit to the extent of 50% of the duty amount assessed at Rs. 1,64,56,452/-. Aggrieved, the appellant filed an application for modification of order dated 7-9-2012 with regard to the amount of pre-deposit waiver granted. The Tribunal rejected the same on 30-1-2013 without considering the grievance on merits with regard to undue hardship and the inability of the appellant to deposit the amount to the extent of pre-deposit waiver granted due to financial constraints. The appeal was dismissed on 10-7-2013 for non-compliance of order dated 7-9-2012. The appellant then filed an application for rectification of the mistaken order dated 10-7-2013 which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 24-1-2014.

(3.) In the meantime, the appellant had approached this Court in Tax Case No. 19 of 2013 against the order dated 7-9-2012 which was withdrawn on 12-3-2014 as infructuous in view of the subsequent dismissal of the appeal itself on 10-7-2013.