TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court upholds Tribunal's pre-deposit order, stresses proof of financial hardship. Compliance crucial for appeal.</h1> <h3>Sagar Construction -Through Director Vishal G. Patel Versus Union of India & 1</h3> The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the Tribunal's order on pre-deposit but extended the time for payment. The Court emphasized the ... Waiver of pre deposit - Financial hardship - Tribunal raised pre deposit demand to hear appeal - Held that:- observations and/or findings made in this order is prima facie and tentative one, the tribunal shall decide the appeal independently without being swayed by such observations or findings. In the event, the deposit is made within the time indicated herein above, the tribunal shall decide the appeal within six months from the date of the communications of this order - Decided against assessee. Issues:Challenge to order of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal on pre-deposit for entertaining appeal.Analysis:The petitioner challenged an order by the Tribunal directing a pre-deposit of Rs. 50 lakhs against a duty demand of Rs. 4.41 Crores. The Tribunal found no error in its order, considering the petitioner's claim of the demand not being sustainable and a strong prima facie case. Despite acknowledging the need for further consideration, the Tribunal reduced the pre-deposit amount based on the facts of the case, which was less than 20% of the principal tax demand.The High Court noted that the petitioner did not establish financial hardship before the Tribunal. While the petitioner raised the issue during arguments, the Tribunal found no supporting evidence in the pleadings. The Court emphasized that financial hardship must be both pleaded and proven, and in the absence of specific pleading and evidence, the Tribunal could not consider any alleged financial hardship in determining the pre-deposit amount.Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the High Court dismissed the petition but extended the time for making the pre-deposit until a specified date. Compliance with this directive would enable the Tribunal to hear the appeal on its merits. The Court found no grounds to entertain the petition, affirming the Tribunal's decision on the pre-deposit amount and emphasizing the importance of establishing financial hardship through proper pleading and evidence in such matters.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
