ENDOLABS LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 21 -10 -2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs & Central Excise, Indore in Case No. 224 -CE/IND/APPEAL -I/2010/1587, by which the petitioner's application for interim stay has been rejected. It has been contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the learned Commissioner has committed error in refusing to allow the petitioner's application, seeking waiver of pre -deposit of duty, fine and penalty. According to him, the petitioner had established a prima facie case on merits. In the circumstances, as there was likelihood of exoneration of the petitioner from payment, the insistence of pre -deposit should have been waived by the Commissioner. It has been further contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is a cryptic order and in the absence of any reasons assigned by the learned Commissioner for rejecting the petitioner's prayer, the same is liable to be quashed and the matter deserves to be remanded back to the Commissioner for re -deciding the petitioner's application.

(2.) On the other hand, Shri V.K. Zelawat, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents has argued that the learned Commissioner has committed no error in rejecting petitioner's application, as the petitioner was not having any prima facie case in his favour.

(3.) Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the impugned order, we find that the petitioner's application filed under Sec. 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, seeking dispensation with pre -deposit of the dues as also the penalty has been rejected by the Commissioner by observing thus: - -