2013 (4) TMI 837

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....plication u/s. 35F thereof. By the said order, the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (hereafter referred to as "the CESTAT") has directed the appellant to deposit 25% of the duty of Rs. 4,27,93,566/-. 3. Submission of Mr. J.T. Gilda, learned Counsel for the appellant is that a unit similarly situated namely M/s. Ramson Casting Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur has raised an identical challenge against the order-in-original and that unit has been given full waiver. The said order was not available when the order dated 7-6-2012 was passed. Because of this view in case of a sister unit, the appellant sought modification and pointed out that - as the challenge raised by it is identical to one mentioned above, it is entitled to s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....), Benara Valves Ltd. and Ors. v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Anr., particularly Paragraphs 11 to 15 are also pressed into service to explain meaning of the phrase "undue hardship". 8. Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India submits that the main appeal in which these orders have been passed is itself dismissed as the amount has not been deposited. He further contends that in the case of M/s. Ramson Casting Pvt. Ltd., there is a specific finding of violation of principles of natural justice and in the present matter, the Authority has recorded a finding that the appellant was extended necessary opportunity and has been heard. 9. He further submits that mere use of word "undue hardship' is not suf....