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>Court reduces pre-deposit amount for Modvat credit petitioner to ease financial burden</h1> <h3>NSIE COMPANY (I) PVT. LTD. Versus CESTAT</h3> The High Court of Bombay varied the order of pre-deposit in a case where a petitioner sought Modvat credit on chillers. The Court reduced the required ... Quantum of pre-deposit - Tribunal dismissed the appeal for failure to comply with the order of pre-deposit - if the judgment in Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi v. Carrier Aircon Ltdis considered the petitioner herein may be entitled to Modvat credit on chillers – Appellant has taken us through the profit and loss account for the year ended 31st March, 2008 which shows that the sale and other income were about Rs. 19.5 lacs and for the previous year Rs. 17.65 lacs. - Considering that the petitioners have made out a case and the hardship that will be occasioned to the petitioners if the Appeal is dismissed without the appeal being heard on merits the ends of justice would be met if the order of dismissal is set aside and the order of pre-deposit is varied to the extent that the petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs. 15.00 lacs - Tribunal to hear the appeal on merits The High Court of Bombay, in the case of F.I. Rebello and D.G. Karnik, JJ., heard a case involving a petitioner seeking Modvat credit on chillers. The duty demand of Rs. 31.00 lacs was redetermined by the A.O. and confirmed by the First Appellate Authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) did not consider the petitioner's entitlement to Modvat credit, leading to an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal ordered a pre-deposit of the entire duty amount, which the petitioner failed to comply with, resulting in dismissal of the appeal.After reviewing the case, the High Court found that the petitioner may indeed be entitled to Modvat credit on chillers based on the judgment in Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi v. Carrier Aircon Ltd. The Court considered the financial situation of the petitioner, noting the profit and loss account figures, and the potential hardship that would arise from dismissing the appeal without consideration of the merits. Consequently, the Court varied the order of pre-deposit, requiring the petitioner to deposit a reduced sum of Rs. 15.00 lacs within sixteen weeks. The Court directed that the appeal would be heard on merits if the deposit was made, otherwise confirming the Tribunal's order of dismissal. The ruling was made absolute with no costs awarded.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
