2011 (2) TMI 1153 - HC - Central Excise

Court upholds Tribunal's waiver of pre-deposit, emphasizes CENVAT credit vs. duty payment distinction.

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the revenue's appeal challenging an interim order by the Tribunal that waived the pre-deposit requirement and ... Waiver of pre-deposit - interim order passed by the Tribunal which waived the liability of pre-deposit and directed the appellant to furnish bank guarantee - Held that:- When once the Appellate Authority, applying its mind to the facts of the case and in exercise of its jurisdiction grants exemption of cash deposit and directs appellant to furnish security, it cannot be found fault with - Appeal is dismissed Issues involved:Challenge to interim order by revenue regarding waiver of pre-deposit and direction to furnish bank guarantee.Analysis:The High Court of Karnataka, in a judgment delivered by N. Kumar, J., addressed the appeal filed by the revenue challenging an interim order by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had waived the liability of pre-deposit in preferring the appeal and directed the appellant to furnish a bank guarantee. The revenue contended that the Tribunal was not justified in dispensing with cash deposit, citing the judgment of the Apex Court in 'Empire Industries Ltd. & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.' The Supreme Court's ruling highlighted the importance of public funds for the functioning of the government and discouraged orders that impede revenue realization. However, the Court distinguished the present case, emphasizing that it involved an issue of CENVAT credit, not non-payment of duty. The Appellate Authority had exercised its discretion in granting exemption from cash deposit and requiring a security, which was found to be appropriate given the circumstances. The Court concluded that no grounds existed to interfere with the discretionary order and subsequently dismissed the appeal.