TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 771
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ramesh For the Respondent in both appeals : Mr. Rajendran Raghavan Senior Panel Counsel JUDGMENT S. VAIDYANATHAN,J. AND C. SARAVANAN,J. The appellant has filed these appeals against the impugned Defect Misc. Order Nos. 40003 & 40004 of 2020 dated 28.01.2020 passed by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai and thereby direct to admit the respective appeals t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of two portions of land admeasuring an extent of 22.68 acres and 14.86 acres. The appellant leased out the said lands vide agreements dated 11.02.2010 and 19.07.2010 to one Shri M. Palanisamy for mining activity for a period of 5 years. 4. It is the case of the appellant that since the lands also contained valuable resources namely Blue Metal and Mineral Sand, the appellant entered into agreeme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Departmental proceedings, the respondent attached the property of the appellant and recovered an amount from the tenants and thereby a sum of Rs.5,03,46,862/- was recovered. 5. It is submitted that against the order dated 25.06.2019 passed by the respondent Commissioner, the appellant was required to pre-deposit only a sum of Rs.3,90,64,511/- out of Rs.50,75,26,810/- at 7.5% in terms of S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 8. We are of the view that the appellant cannot be denied of being heard on merits in an appeal as more than 7.5% of the amount required for pre-deposit has been recovered by the Department from the petitioner's clients. The amount has to be treated as pre-deposit for the purpose of Section 35 F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to appeals against order passed under the Fina....