TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (2) TMI 58
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xcise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [The Tribunal] in Miscellaneous Order No.42733 of 2013 dated 22.11.2013. The said miscellaneous petition was filed by the assessee seeking for stay and waiver of the pre-deposit for the purpose of entertaining the appeal filed against the order in Original dated 17.10.2012. The Tribunal, after considering the case of the assessee, directed it to deposit a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs only) within a period of four weeks. Challenging the same, the assessee, is on appeal before this Court and seeks admission of the appeal on the following questions of law: 1. Is the 2nd respondent Tribunal right in directing the appellants to pre-deposit a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs only....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailable with the 2nd respondent; and therefore, the benefit of the said Notification should go in favour of the appellants. The denial of such Notification in terms of the order under challenge before the 2nd respondent and consequent demand of duty and adjudication liabilities is per se unsustainable? 6. Has the 2nd respondent Tribunal erred in directing pre-deposit when admittedly the appellants have made out a prima facie case in their favour against the demand? 7. Whether the 2nd respondent Tribunal erred in not taking into consideration that the requirement of the appellants to furnish CT-1 forms in terms of the above Notification was a condition impossible to fulfil and the predicament of the appellants was being discussed betwe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed by the Tribunal by referring to the submissions made by the assessee before the Original Authority. Further, it is submitted that the Tribunal has only directed pre-deposit of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs only) when the duty demand is nearly Rupees two crores. 5. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials placed on record. 6. The assessee is carrying on business in the manufacture of plastic hangers and is supplying the same to the various customers who are garment exporters. The plastic hangers are cleared by the assessee from their factory to the export house by availing the benefit of Notification No.31/07 Central Excise NT dated 02.08.2007. 7. It is the case of the assessee tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isfied that there was no cause for invoking the extended period of limitation, in the absence of a clear cut case of suppression of material facts for the purpose of invoking the extended period. Having observed so, the Tribunal further proceeded to observe that prima facie the assessee appears to have contravened and failed to comply with the conditions specified in the Notification No.31/2007-CE(NT). 8. From the series of communications sent by the Development Commissioner to the Central Excise Authorities as well as Director General of Foreign Trade, it is evident that the assessee is a 100% Exported Oriented Unit. It would be of relevance to refer to the observations contained in the various communications sent by the Development Com....