Court upholds mandatory pre-deposit for CESTAT appeals post-amendment. Financial hardship plea denied.

The court dismissed the writ petition challenging Circulars on mandatory pre-deposit for CESTAT appeals post-amendment to Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. The court upheld the amendment's requirement of pre-deposit for pending appeals at rates of 7.5% or 10%. The petitioner's financial hardship plea, citing a High Court decision, was not accepted, and the court emphasized the legislative intent behind the amendment, ruling that ceasing operations does not dissolve a legal entity's duty. The court found the financial hardship plea insufficient for a complete waiver of pre-deposit and dismissed the writ petition without costs.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to Circulars on mandatory pre-deposit for appeal before CESTAT; Interpretation of Section 35F of Central Excise Act; Financial hardship plea in relation to pre-deposit requirement.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges Circulars on mandatory pre-deposit for CESTAT appeals post-amendment to Section 35F of Central Excise Act. Petitioner seeks declaration that appeals initiated pre-amendment should follow old provision. Court declines to reconsider validity of Section 35F based on previous decisions. Amendment mandates pre-deposit of 7.5%/10% for pending appeals. Petitioner's appeal, post-amendment, demands pre-deposit. Financial hardship plea raised, citing Allahabad High Court decision. Court adjourns to assess Petitioner's ceased status.

The Petitioner's ceased status is scrutinized. Sole proprietor explains Petitioner's non-existence since 2007 due to Indian Oil Corporation's actions. However, joint venture details indicate ongoing liabilities. Court rules that ceasing operations doesn't dissolve legal entity's duty. Proprietary concerns can't unilaterally declare non-existence. Amendment curtails CESTAT's discretion on pre-deposit, emphasizing legislative intent.

Despite Article 226 powers, Court deems complete waiver unjustified. Rare cases warranting interference noted. Financial hardship plea insufficient for pre-deposit waiver. Writ petition dismissed without costs, upholding amended Section 35F's applicability.

---