AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 190
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2002, duty on goods removed from the factory or warehouse during a month shall be paid by the 5th day of the following month, and in the case of goods removed during the month of March, the duty shall be paid by the 31st day of March. It also provides for other conditions, of which we are not concerned. 3.3. Rule 8(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 provides that if the assessee fails to pay the amount of duty by due date, he shall be liable to pay the outstanding amount along with interest at the rate specified by the Central Government vide notification under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act on the outstanding amount, for the period starting with the first day after due date till the date of actual payment of the outstanding amount. 3.4. Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 states that if the assessee defaults in payment of duty beyond thirty days from the due date, as prescribed in sub-rule (1), then notwithstanding anything contained in said sub-rule (1) and sub-rule (4) of rule 3 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the assessee shall, pay excise duty for each consignment at the time of removal, without utilizing the CENVAT credit till the date the assessee pays th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 11(A) of Central Excise Act, 1944 along with applicable interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 8 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, with reference to SCNs 19/2011, dt. 2.6.2011. (ii) I hereby demand payment of the amount of duty of Rs. 48,46,517/- (Rs. forty eight lakhs forty six thousand five hundred and seventeen only) from the assessee for the clearance of excisable goods effected during January 2011 to October 2011, in cash through PLA account in terms of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and Section 11(A) of Central Excise Act, 1944 along with applicable interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 8 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, with reference to SCNs 52/2011-12, dt. 3.1.2012. (iii) I also demand interest on the above demand of duty of Rs. 42,84,883/- from the assessee for the clearance of excisable goods effected during May 2010 to December 2010, as demanded in the show cause notice 19/2011 dt. 2.6.2011 under erstwhile Sec.11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. (iv) I also demand interest on the above demand of duty of Rs. 48,46,517/- from the assessee for the clearance of excisable goods effected....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a plea that the date fixed for payment of the pre-deposit amounts is 21.3.2013; since the petitioner has to mobilise the funds for paying the pre-deposit amount, some time may be granted to the petitioner to pay the pre-deposit amounts ordered by the second respondent in the impugned order and on such payment, he requested that the second respondent-appellate authority may be directed to take up the appeals themselves and dispose of the same within a reasonable time limit. Learned counsel for the respondents/Revenue has no objection for such course. 18. In the light of the above submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to pay the pre-deposit amounts as ordered by the second respondent-appellate authority in the impugned common order, dated 22.2.2013, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; on such payment, the second respondent is directed to take up the appeals themselves and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, dispose of the appeals, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks there....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Excise, Appeals and on the order of the High Court dated 20.3.2013 in W.P.No.6752 and 6753 of 2013 dealing with pre-deposit alone? (4) Whether the Tribunal is justified in directing to pay pre-deposit of Rs. 45,65,700/- ((Rupees forty five lakhs sixty five thousand and seven hundred only) in the present case, when the Tribunal itself, for the same appellant, in an earlier appeal, where the facts are similar to the facts of the case on hand, vide Misc.Order No.42363/2013, dated 25.9.2013 has directed to pay only interest without any pre-deposit? (5) Whether the Tribunal is justified in passing different orders for same set of facts involving same issue, for the same appellant both covered by Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002? 3.15. As the conditional order passed by the Tribunal was not complied with, the Tribunal, by Final Order Nos.40383-40385 of 2014, dated 2.7.2014, dismissed the appeals. Aggrieved by the said order, C.M.A.Nos.2224 and 2225 of 2014 are filed raising the following substantial questions of law: (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in not considering flouting of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct of a similar demand of duty of Rs. 14,18,184/- for the period from August, 2008 to March, 2009 unconditional stay of the demand was granted taking note of the fact that the appellant had debited the said amount in their CENVAT account, ought to have granted unconditional stay of demand for the subsequent periods also, which is the cause of action for the present batch of appeals, which got entangled into a number of knots purely on hyper technical plea. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant also pointed out that the Tribunal while dismissing the appeals for non compliance of the conditional stay order did not consider CENVAT credit was available and that will be sufficient to safeguard the interest of the Revenue. 7. Mr.P.Mahadevan, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent has reiterated the stand of the Department before the Tribunal and authorities below and pleaded for dismissal of these appeals. 8. We have heard Mr.S.M.Deenadayalan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.P.Mahadevan, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent and perused the orders passed by the Tribunal and the authorities below. 9. We find that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 8(ii) As the subject demand, to be paid in PLA/cash (without utilization of CENVAT credit) is sustainable, the demand for interest under Section 11AB is also sustainable. On further appeal, the Tribunal granted conditional stay of the said order, as stated supra. 10. For the subsequent periods, the Order-in-Original was passed demanding duty, interest and penalty. On appeal, the very same Commissioner (Appeals) disposed of the stay petitions on 22.2.2013, namely, two days after the first order dated 20.2.2013, based on a plea made by the assessee who offered to pay 50% of the duty confirmed as pre-deposit within one month's time, holding as under: 8. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances and keeping the interest of Revenue & balance of convenience, I order to pay a pre-deposit of 50% of the duty confirmed, (Rs.42,84,883/- for the period May 2010 to December 2010 and Rs. 48,46,517/- for the period January 2011 to October 2011), in Cash/PLA, in the impugned Order No.08 & 09/2013, dt.30.8.2012 by 21.3.2013 and waive the pre-deposit of interest and penalty imposed in the impugned order, under Section 35F of CEA. 9. If the Appellants fail to pay the said pre-deposit....