GUJARAT ELECTROMELT LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr. Asim Pandya, learned advocate waives service of rule. At the request of the learned advocates for the parties, the petitions are taken up for final disposal today.

(2.) For three different periods, three different show cause notices were issued which were culminated into the order at Annexure 'C' whereby the Assistant Commissioner, Division II, Central Excise, Mehsana, confirmed the demand of Rs.15,55,554.00 raised vide show cause notice mentioned in the order and imposed a penalty of Rs.15,55,554.00 under third proviso to sub-Rule 3 of Rules 96 ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Assistant Commissioner also assessed the assessee to pay interest at the rate of 18% on the amount outstanding for the period from due date till the actual payment of the sum as confirmed under Section 96 ZO (3) of the Act. The said order was challenged by three different appeals and stay applications were also preferred. The Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise and Customs, Ahmedabad, vide Annexure 'E', directed the appellants to pre-deposit Rs.15,55,554.00 towards duty amount by 25.8.1999 and proof thereof by 31.8.1999. So far as the amount of penalty is concerned, the same has been waived till disposal of the appeals. It is against this order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise and Customs, Ahmedabad, the present petitions are preferred.

(3.) The applicant in the stay applications pointed out that the Registrar for the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, Government of India, New Delhi, addressed a letter dated 22.1.1998 to the Commercial Manager of the applicant company in which it was stated that the company's reference was received on 8.12.1997 which stood registered as Case No. 9/98.