TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 489
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tertain' means when the appeal is taken up for hearing on merit at the time of hearing of the appeal, the amount of 7.5% of duty should stand deposited. It is not mandatory to make this deposit before the Tribunal entertains the appeal that means before hearing of the appeal on merit. In support of his contention he refers to Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944, according to 35 B(i) D(i) the discretion of Appellate Tribunal to refuse or to admit an appeal is provided in certain circumstances but the appellant is not covered under such circumstances, therefore this Tribunal cannot refuse to admit the appeal only for want of 7.5% deposit as provided under Section 35F. He also refers sub-section (5) of Section 35B wherein the discretion of appellate Tribunal for admission of an appeal is provided when the appeal is filed after the expiry of stipulated time period for filing the appeal. It is his submission that in view of 35B (i) d(i) and subsection (5) it is clear that there is no discretion available to the Tribunal not to admit the appeal for want of deposit of 7.5%. As regards the term 'entertain' provided under Section 35F he refers to the dictionary meaning of 'enter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner (A.R.) submits that in terms of Section 35F, the deposit of 7.5% is mandatory and the same is required to be deposited and compliance of the same to be made at the time of filing the appeal. He refers to Circular F. No. 15/CESTAT/General/2013-14 dated 14/10/2014 issued by this Tribunal with the approval of the President of the Tribunal according to which no exemption has been contemplated either in the amended provision of the Act statutes, or even in the clarificatory circular issued by the CBEC on the subject. It is his submission that in view of the said circular the payment of 7.5% is mandatory requirement for filing the appeal before this tribunal. He also brought to the notice of this Bench that as per Clause 98 of Finance Bill 2014 it seeks to substitute to Section 35 F of the Central Excise Act and objective of the said amendment is to provide for deposit of certain percentage of duty demanded or penalty imposed or both, before filing the appeal, therefore 7.5% of the duty amount has to be deposited before filing of the appeal. Ld. A.R. refers to CBEC Circular 984/A/2014-CX dated 16/9/2014 according to which the payment of 7.5% is required to be made at the time of fili....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y is deposited. As regard the submission of Ld. Counsel that the appeal cannot be dismissed for want of said deposit due to the reason that deposit is required only for entertaining the appeal by the Tribunal, we are of the view that as regard appeal procedure in this appellate Tribunal, the moment appeal is filed, it attains the stage of entertaining the appeal by the Tribunal. Unlike procedure in the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court, there is no procedure in this Appellate Tribunal for motion hearing on admission of the appeal. In this Tribunal when the appeal is filed it is registered and appeal number is allotted and thereafter the appeal is matured for considering on merit. Therefore since there is no provision of admission of the appeal in this Tribunal the moment the appeal is filed it stands admitted and become due for consideration on merit. Therefore the mandatory deposit of 7.5% or 10% as the case may be is required to be deposited by the appellant and to be complied at the time of filing of the appeal itself. We have perused old Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and 129E of the Customs Act, 1962, according to which the appellant was allowed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e made keeping in mind the purpose and objective of the statutory provisions which is under interpretation. On this issue we take reliance from the following judgments: (1) [2009 (233) ELT 3(SC)] Corporation bank versus Saraswati abharansala 25. Furthermore the Notification having been given a retrospective effect must be construed on the touchstone of the purpose and object it sought to achieve. Principle of purposive construction should be applied in a case of this nature to find out the object of the Act. When a statute cannot be considered in such a manner which would defeat its object, the legislature is presumed to be aware of the consequences flowing therefrom. The statute should be considered in such manner so as to hold that it serves to seek a reasonable result. The statute would not be considered in such a manner so as to encourage defaulters and discourage those who abide by the law. (b) [2012(286) E.L.T. 321 (S.C)/ Commr. of C.Ex, New Delhi versus Connaught Plaza Restaurant (P) Ltd. 16. The general rules of interpretation of taxing statutes were succinctly summarized by this Court in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Collector of Central Excise & Ors. 1993 Supp (3) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....end on the text and the context. They are the bases of interpretation. One may well say if the text is the texture, context is what gives the colour. Neither can be ignored. Both are important. That interpretation is best which makes the textual interpretation match the contextual. A statute is best interpreted when the object and purpose of its enactment is known. With this knowledge, the statute must be read first as a whole and then section by section, clause by clause, phrase by phrase and word by word. If a statute is looked at, in the context of its enactment, with the glasses of the statute maker, provided by such context its scheme, the sections, clauses, phrases and words may take colour and appear different than when the statute is looked at without the glasses provided by the context. With these glasses the court must look at the Act as a whole and discover what each section, each clause, each phrase and each word is meant and designed to say as to fit into the scheme of the entire Act. No part of a statute and no word of a statute can be construed in isolation. In the above judgments, it is settled that interpretation of statute has to be made keeping in view the purpo....