Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Deposit Directive

The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the directive to deposit 50% of the duty amount by the appellate tribunal. The court found the petitioner's vague assertion of undue hardship without substantial evidence insufficient. Despite the tribunal's leniency in requiring only a 50% deposit, the court saw no justification to interfere with the order, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition. Additionally, the court deemed the writ petition unsustainable due to the appealable nature of orders under Section 35(F) of the Central Excise Act, as the petitioner did not appeal the order. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition and vacated the interim order without imposing costs.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to the direction to deposit 50% of the duty amount by the appellate tribunal.
2. Maintainability of the writ petition due to appealable order under Section 35(F) of the Central Excise Act.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the directive to deposit 50% of the duty amount by the appellate tribunal in a writ petition. The petitioner contended that the tribunal did not consider the undue hardship faced, and raised various grounds asserting non-liability to pay the duty. However, the Assistant Solicitor General argued that the writ petition should be dismissed as the order is appealable, citing the Benara Valves Ltd. case. The court noted the petitioner's vague assertion of undue hardship without substantial evidence. Referring to the Supreme Court's judgment, the court highlighted the need for the petitioner to establish undue hardship. Despite the tribunal's leniency in requiring only 50% deposit, the court found no justification to interfere with the order, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition.

2. The court addressed the maintainability of the writ petition due to the appealable nature of orders under Section 35(F). The Assistant Solicitor General contended that any order under this section, including refusal to dispense with pre-deposit, is appealable to the High Court. Since the petitioner did not appeal the order, the court deemed the writ petition unsustainable on this ground as well. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, vacated the interim order, and closed related motions without imposing costs.

---