2011 (4) TMI 676 - AT - Central Excise

Appellate Tribunal Grants Adjournment, Modifies Deposit Conditions

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, granted the Assessees' adjournment request and restored their appeals dismissed for non-compliance with stay ... Waiver of pre-deposite - deposit 20% of the duty - Modvat Credit availed by the appellants on the basis of fake and fictitious invoices - Held that:- the Tribunal in the case of M/s Roop Dyg. & Ptg. Mills (2011 -TMI - 208505 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD), Revenue has taken into consideration entire case laws on the point and has modified the directions to deposit 20% in the cases of appellants similarly situate - Inasmuch as the same identical issue is involved in the present appeal, we recall our orders of dismissal of appeals, modify the condition of deposit of 20% and grant unconditional stays - Further, the appeals stand remanded to the original adjudicating authority for de-novo decision in the light of the Tribunal s decision in the case of M/s Bhagwati Silk Mills referred supra. Issues:Adjournment request by the Assessees; Restoration of appeals dismissed for non-compliance with stay orders.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, involved the consideration of applications for restoration of appeals dismissed due to non-compliance with stay orders. The appellants were directed to deposit 20% of the duty confirmed against them as a condition of hearing their appeal, which was confirmed by denying Modvat Credit on the basis of fake and fictitious invoices. Subsequently, the appeals were dismissed for non-compliance with Section 35F provisions. The Tribunal had decided identical issues in other cases, modifying the deposit conditions and granting unconditional stays. The appeals were to be restored, the deposit condition modified, unconditional stays granted, and matters remanded for de-novo adjudication.In the case of M/s Roop Dyg. & Ptg. Mills, the Revenue had considered various case laws and modified the deposit directions for similarly situated appellants. Given the identical issue in the present appeal, the Tribunal recalled the orders of dismissal, modified the deposit condition, granted unconditional stays, and remanded the appeals to the original adjudicating authority for fresh decisions based on previous judgments.The judgment disposed of the applications and appeals in the above manner, emphasizing the modification of deposit conditions, granting of unconditional stays, and remanding the matters for de-novo adjudication in line with previous decisions. The Tribunal's thorough consideration of similar cases and legal principles led to the restoration and modification of the appeals, ensuring fair treatment and adherence to legal procedures.