2016 (8) TMI 439

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ngaged in the manufacture of various herbal products. A dispute arose regarding classification and thereupon correct duty liability of "natural wash powder and "Brahmi Amla Oil". The proceedings concluded vide Order dated 31.01.2013. The Original Authority decided the classification and confirmed a demand of Rs. 42,03,742/- and imposed equal amount of penalty on the applicant. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide Stay Order dated 19.02.2014 ordered for pre-deposit of the entire duty. However, the penalty was waived for pre-deposit. On 26.3.2014, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal for non-compliance of the above mentioned order for pre-deposit. The applicant filed appeal before the Tribunal on 4.7.2014 along with applic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....modification of the Final Order dated 28.11.2014 of this Tribunal. The amended provisions of Section 35 F are applicable only for the appeals filed after the said amendment. The matter has been examined in detail by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Ganesh Yadav Vs. Union of India - 2015 (320) ELT 711 (Allahabad) and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Anjani Technoplast Ltd. - 2015 (326) ELT 472 (Delhi). 6. We have heard both the sides. 7. The only point for decision is whether or not there is a case for modification of Final Order dated 28.11.2014 of the Tribunal ordering for pre-deposit of Rs. 7,50,000/- for admission of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The only plea of the appellant is that they should be governed b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... F, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad and the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi had occasion to examine the provisions in detail. In Ganesh Yadav (supra), the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court after examining the various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the legal principles, concluded as below:- "20. The intendment of Section 35F of the Act is further clarified by the second proviso which stipulates that the provisions of the section shall not apply to stay applications and appeals which were pending before any appellate authority prior to the commencement of Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014. The second proviso is a clear indicator that Parliament has exempted the requirement of complying with the pre-deposit as mandated by Sect....