Property attachment for excise dues cannot continue after balance recovery is stayed and substantial pre-deposit is already made.

Where the assessee had already made a substantial pre-deposit and the Tribunal dispensed with the remaining pre-deposit while staying recovery of the balance demand, an attachment issued merely as an aid to recovery could not be sustained. The High Court held that such attachment could not continue once recovery of the balance duty was stayed, and the impugned attachment order was liable to be lifted. The writ petition succeeded and the attachment was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the attachment of the petitioner's property for recovery of excise dues could continue after the Tribunal had dispensed with the balance pre-deposit and stayed recovery to that extent.

Analysis: The petitioner had already deposited a substantial amount towards the duty demand. The Tribunal took note of that deposit and granted dispensation from the remaining pre-deposit, thereby staying recovery of the balance demand. In that situation, the attachment order, being only a measure in aid of recovery, could not be permitted to survive.

Conclusion: The attachment could not continue and was liable to be lifted.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the impugned attachment order was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Once recovery of the balance duty is stayed and the assessee has made substantial pre-deposit, an attachment issued merely as an aid to recovery cannot be allowed to continue.

---