Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Court grants stay for waiver of pre-deposit under Central Excise Act. Appellant's deposit deemed sufficient. The court, comprising Mr. M.V. Ravindran and Mr. H.K. Thakur, JJ., granted the appellant's stay petitions for waiver of pre-deposit of duty under Section ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court grants stay for waiver of pre-deposit under Central Excise Act. Appellant's deposit deemed sufficient.
The court, comprising Mr. M.V. Ravindran and Mr. H.K. Thakur, JJ., granted the appellant's stay petitions for waiver of pre-deposit of duty under Section 11A (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant had already deposited an amount exceeding 8% of the total liability, which the court deemed sufficient. The remaining balance amounts were stayed pending appeal disposal, following precedents set by the Bench in similar cases.
Issues involved: Stay petitions for waiver of pre-deposit of duty confirmed under Section 11A (1) of Central Excise Act, 1944, short payment of duty, interest, and penalty on the main appellant and penalties on directors.
Analysis: The judgment delivered by Mr. M.V. Ravindran and Mr. H.K. Thakur, JJ., pertains to three stay petitions filed by the main appellant, M/s. Oracle Granito Ltd., seeking the waiver of pre-deposit of a duty amount confirmed under Section 11A (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, along with interest and penalty. The confirmed demand of duty on the main appellant was Rs.6,40,79,539, out of which they had already deposited Rs.1,60,00,000 during the investigation phase. The appellant's counsel argued that the amount paid constituted approximately 30% of the duty confirmed by lower authorities. The counsel referred to a directive from the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, which mandated the deposit of 8% of the total confirmed duty amount. The counsel presented a copy of a similar order by the Bench to support their argument.
Upon reviewing the records and hearing both parties, the judges found that the appellant had already deposited an amount exceeding 8% of the total liability. Relying on previous orders of the Bench in similar cases, the judges deemed the deposit sufficient to proceed with hearing the appeals. Consequently, the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of the remaining balance amounts were allowed, and the recovery of those amounts was stayed until the appeals were disposed of. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in the court, granting relief to the appellant based on the deposit made and the precedents set by the Bench in similar cases.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
of 
TaxTMI 
