2005 (7) TMI 116

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... petitioner. None appears on behalf of the respondents though Mr. Malkan had prayed for time on 15th July, 2005 and his request had been granted. 2. The limited issue which the Court is called upon to decide is whether the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai (CESTAT), while disposing of Stay Application No. E/S/2796/04-MUM vide order dated 29th March, 2005 w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pheld the stand of the Department, against which the petitioner preferred appeal before the CESTAT. Along with the appeal, the petitioner had moved an application seeking stay of operation of the impugned order and dispense with making of pre-deposit. On 29th March, 2005, CESTAT made an order directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 30 lakhs treating the same as sufficient compliance for t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f Tribunal, it is apparent that, after recording facts in paragraph Nos. 1 to 7 of its order, the 'Tribunal has in paragraph No. 8 stated that, "The appellants pleaded financial hardship and the matter is said to be pending before the BIFR". Thereafter, in paragraph No. 9, reference to Supreme Court decision in case of Metal Box [2003 (155) E.L.T. 13 (S.C.)] has been made to state that an absolute....