<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>High Court upholds Rs. 10 crore pre-deposit requirement for CESTAT appeals under Central Excise Act, dismisses waiver plea.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83632</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the requirement of pre-deposit of Rs. 10 crore for filing an appeal before the CESTAT u/s 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court held that it lacked discretion to grant a waiver or reduction in the pre-deposit amount, as it would be contrary to the legislative intent. The petitioner was directed to avail the alternative statutory remedy of filing an appeal before the CESTAT. The court observed that while considering a waiver, it must examine if the petitioner has a prima facie case likely to succeed, indicating no gross injustice, excessive demand contrary to facts, or perverse orders, coupled with blameless conduct. However, after examining the facts, the court found no merit to grant a waiver and dismissed the petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2024 08:44:22 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2024 08:44:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=780676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>High Court upholds Rs. 10 crore pre-deposit requirement for CESTAT appeals under Central Excise Act, dismisses waiver plea.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83632</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the requirement of pre-deposit of Rs. 10 crore for filing an appeal before the CESTAT u/s 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court held that it lacked discretion to grant a waiver or reduction in the pre-deposit amount, as it would be contrary to the legislative intent. The petitioner was directed to avail the alternative statutory remedy of filing an appeal before the CESTAT. The court observed that while considering a waiver, it must examine if the petitioner has a prima facie case likely to succeed, indicating no gross injustice, excessive demand contrary to facts, or perverse orders, coupled with blameless conduct. However, after examining the facts, the court found no merit to grant a waiver and dismissed the petition.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2024 08:44:22 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>