TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1042
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Application maintained under Section 35 F of the Act by directing the appellant to deposit fifty per cent of the Rs. 3.07 crores, i.e. Rs. 1.58 crore within a period of eight weeks; learned counsel for the appellant, in fact, would not dispute that the deposit of amount of Rs. 3.07 crores shown should be read as Rs. 3.17 crores. 2. The total duty involved appears to be Rs. 4.06 crores. We extract hereunder the order passed by the Tribunal: "The total duty of Rs. 4.06 crores approximately stands confirmed against the appellant in respect of Phenol Formaldehyde Resin, Urea Formaldehyde Resin, Melamine Formaldehyde Resin and Cordanol Formaldehyde Resins, which are resins manufactured by the appellant and used captively in the manufacture....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the products, which are referred to in the first paragraph. The case of the appellant was that the appellant has not received fair consideration before the Tribunal, inasmuch as, its Application for exemption from pre-deposit has not been considered on merits. 5. When we queried the learned counsel for the appellant as to the orders, which are referred to by the Tribunal in paragraph- 3, he would respond by saying that they are related to other manufacturers. In short, the complaint is that the actual contentions raised by the appellant were not as such considered. This is in response to the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent, who contended that there is no substantial question of law made out and what is really involved....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Supreme Court's decision has been followed by the Tribunal in the following cases:- i) Virat Laminates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad: 1996 (85) ELT 191 (Tribunal), ii) Metro Wood & Engg. Works Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad 1996 (65) ECR 79 (Tribunal), iii) CCE, Ahmedabad Vs. Metrowood & Engg. Works Pvt. Ltd.: 1998 (98) ELT 383 (Tribunal) 3. We heard Shri H.K. Jain, learned SDR. 4. As the issue involved in the appeal has been settled by the Supreme Court in the case of Moti Laminates, following the ratio of that decision, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal." 7. According to him, the Commissioner has not properly considered the case of the appellant, namely, that resin, which is captively consumed in the manufacture of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the consequences flowing from the order requiring the assessee to deposit full or part of the demand. There can be no rule of universal application in such matters and the order has to be passed keeping in view the factual scenario involved. Merely because this Court has indicated the principles that does not give a license to the forum/authority to pass an order which cannot be sustained on the touchstone of fairness, legality and public interest. Where denial of interim relief may lead to public mischief, grave irreparable private injury or shake a citizens' faith in the impartiality of public administration, interim relief can be given. 12. As noted above there are two important expressions in Section 35-F. One is undue hardship. Th....