2000 (7) TMI 425

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....were received in the Registry on 10-9-99. Alongwith the appeals, they also filed 13 separate stay applications for waiving the requirement of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amounts adjudged against them, till the disposal of their appeals. 2.  The stay applications came-up for hearing on 14-10-1999 when on request made by the applicants the same were adjourned to 11-11-1999. On 11-11-1999, when the matter was called, no one appeared for the applicants. The Bench noted that the matter had come-up earlier on 14-10-1999 when on request made by the applicants in the presence of one Shri Ved Prakash, the matter was adjourned for 11-11-99. As there was no reason for any adjournment, the matter was proceeded with and was dealt with on mer....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hich show that the appellants had suffered huge financial losses and in case they are directed to deposit the amount of duty and penalty as above they will be very badly hit financially. (B)     An application of the appellants had been registered with B.I.F.R. and on this account alone the condition for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty could be waived under proviso to Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Reliance placed on High Court of Adjudicature of Bombay's Order in the case of Maharastra State Financial Corporation v. Benholm Stools Ltd. (C)     The Statements relied upon by the adjudicating authority had immediately been retracted and the appellants has prima facie a stro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....duty, without issue of invoices and without accounting for the same in their statutory records and also cleared 78681.10 Mtrs of processed man made fabrics on short payment of duty in contravention of the provisions of Rules 9(1), 52A, 53, 54, 55, 173C, 173F, 173G and 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and Section 3 of Additional Duty of Excise (Goods of Special importance) Act, 1957 evading thereby central excise duty of Rs. 51,89,271/- (BED Rs. 31,13,562.60 and AED Rs. 20,75,708.40), which appeared to be recoverable from them under proviso to Section 11A (1) of the Central Excises Act, 1944, read with Rule 9 (2) of the Central Excises Rules, 1944 and Section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (goods of special importance) Act, 1957.....