2017 (8) TMI 1463

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri Lakshmi Kumaran and Sridharan, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri B. Narasimha Sarma, Advocate, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT [Judgment per : V. Ramasubramanian, J. (Common)]. - The assessee has come up with the above appeals under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, challenging (1) a conditional order passed by the CESTAT for the grant of waiver and stay, and (2) a conseq....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ith an application for stay. 4. By an order, dated 21-2-2014, the CESTAT granted stay on condition that the appellant deposits Rs. 1.75 crores. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed C.E.A. No. 95 of 2014 before this Court. The appeal was admitted by this Court on the substantial question as to whether the Tribunal was justified in refusing to grant full waiver. 5. In the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng that the entire amount has been paid on 3-3-2017. In other words, the conditional order passed by the Tribunal on 21-2-2014 has been complied with, though after a period of three years. Therefore, the only question that we are called upon to consider is as to whether the same can be taken note of to rejuvenate the appeal filed by the appellant. 8. Now, it is contended by both the Learne....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l. Therefore, this is a case where the question of classification itself was in doubt and the matter was travelling back and forth. In such circumstances, the compliance with the conditional order, though belatedly made, can be taken note of. After all, by giving a new lease of life to the appeal, the appellant would only have an opportunity to argue the main appeal before the Tribunal on merits. ....