PRAVEEN CHANDRA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 21.4.2014 (Annexure A-1) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") claiming the following substantial questions of law:-

(2.) A few facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The appellant is Director of M/s Kay Iron Works (Jorian) Pvt. Ltd. In February 2005, Officers of Directorate General of Central Excise (Intelligence), New Delhi initiated an investigation against various dealers, manufacturers and brokers alleging that they were not actually supplying the material but invoices were supplied and manufacturers were taking credit without actual receipt of material. Investigation was also initiated against the appellant. A show cause notice dated 30.3.2006 was issued to the appellant for imposing penalty under Rule 26 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2001/02. The said show cause notice was duly replied by the appellant. The Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 19.1.2009 imposed penalty of Rs. 50 lacs upon the appellant apart from imposing penalty upon the company. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal along with stay application before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 4.9.2009 (Annexure A-3) besides dismissing the appeals of the dealers, reduced the penalty amount in the case of the appellant from Rs. 50 lacs to Rs. 5 lacs. On filing of rectification application, the Tribunal recalled its order dated 4.9.2009 and fixed the matter for hearing of stay application. The Tribunal vide order dated 24.2.2012 (Annexure A-4) dispensed with the condition of deposit of duty in the case of the company and directed the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs. 5 lacs as a condition precedent for hearing of the appeal. Against the order dated 24.2.2012 (Annexure A- 4), the appellant filed CWP No. 9299 of 2012. This Court vide order dated 5.7.2012 (Annexure A-5) granted interim stay. Ultimately, this Court vide order dated 23.1.2013 (Annexure A-6) dismissed the writ petition with liberty to the appellant to file an appeal. The appellant filed CEA No. 40 of 2013 and this Court vide order dated 1.5.2013 (Annexure A-7) dismissed the appeal with liberty to approach the Tribunal for clarification regarding adjustment of excess amount of Rs. 65 lacs deposited by the company against 25% penalty required to be deposited as a pre-condition for entertaining the appeal. The appellant in terms of order dated 24.2.2012 (Annexure A-4) deposited Rs. 5 lacs on 13/14.5.2013. The Tribunal vide order dated 21.4.2014 (Annexure A-1) dismissed the appeal for failure of pre-deposit within the stipulated period. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the amount of Rs. 5 lacs as directed by the Tribunal vide order dated 24.2.2012 (Annexure A-4) as pre-deposit for hearing of the appeal was deposited on 13/14.5.2013. According to the learned counsel, the delay had occurred due to the facts and circumstances noticed hereinabove. It was urged that in the interest of justice, delay in deposit of Rs. 5 lacs be condoned as in the case of the company the appeal is fixed for final hearing before the Tribunal.