VATAN TEXTILES LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent of parties the matter is heard finally.

(2.) By this petition, petitioners Impugned orders dated 5-10-2005 and dated 5-12-2005 passed by respondent No. 2-Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short "Tribunal"). The Tribunal directed the petitioner to pre-deposit Rs. 25,00,000.00 (Rs. Twenty Five lakhs) within a period of eight weeks and report compliance thereof on 5-12-2005 as condition precedent to entertain the appeal as required under Sec. 35(F) of the Central Excise Act.

(3.) The petitioner No. 1 is a Textile Unit and was served with a notice under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act of 1944 by the Additional Director General of the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence, Zonal Unit, Mumbai on 13-11-2004. The petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why an amount of Rs. 1,00,32,600.00 (Rs. One crore Thirty Two Thousand Six Hundred) be not recovered under the first proviso of Sub-section (1) of Sec. 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest. So also, petitioner No. 2, who is Director of the petitioner No. 1, was called upon to show cause as to why personal penalty be not imposed on him under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The petitioners submitted their explanations to the notices served on them. They urged that the demand was not proper and correct. The respondent No. 3 assessed them for tax liability and directed them to pay excise duty of Rs. 1,00,32,600.00 (Rs. One crore thirty two thousand six hundred). They preferred separate appeals against the order of respondent No. 3 in respect of the demand for excise duty. The Tribunal directed them to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 25,00,000.00 (Rs. Twenty Five Lakhs) as condition precedent to entertain the appeals. The Tribunal further directed that on making such pre-deposit the recovery shall be stayed. The petitioners deposited an amount of Rs. 6,00,000.00 (Rs. Six lakhs) and requested to modify the said orders. The petitioners, who were appellants before the Tribunal, urged to consider the financial hardship and to allow hearing of the appeals without asking for further deposit of the remaining amount of Rs. 19,00,000.00 (Rs. Nineteen lakhs). Their request was rejected though the time for pre-deposit of balance amount was extended by further period of 12 weeks. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have preferred this petition.