TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (10) TMI 249
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....giving rise to the present appeal. 2. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of anode out of copper concentrate. According to it, the anode manufactured by petitioner is transferred to its plant in Silvasa, Gujarat in entirety to manufacture cathodes and/or copper rods. The petitioner has been discharging appropriate duty at the time of clearance at its factory gate in Tuticorin on the anodes, since anodes manufactured by petitioner are 100% captively consumed by petitioner at its factory in Silvasa, those anodes are valued u/s 4(1)(b) of Central Excise Act, 1994 as it stood prior to 1st July, 2000 r/w Rule 6(1)(b) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975, it is entitled to the benefit and credit cost duty paid at Tuticorin pl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....us that by merging the two together, by addition of the margin of profit (the other issues not being disputed), the duty payable would come down to Rs. 44.56 crores. The applicant has deposited Rs. 15.00 crores. He offers to deposit as an indicator of goodwill another Rs. 15.00 crores within four weeks from today, we find this offer reasonable and accept it." The petitioner-company, thereafter, filed an application for modification of the said order, it was contended that the petitioner-company was running through severe financial liquidity crunch, the bank limits have been exceeded and there is recession in demand, both in domestic as well as international market. The Mumbai Bench of CEGAT noticed that the petitioner-company made profit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....noticed the observation of CEGAT that if within the time prescribed for deposit of Rs. 15 Crores, refund claim of the applicant is accepted, out of the said amount, the amount of Rs. 15 crores can be withheld, directed the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Central Excise Division-III, Silvasa and Dadar Nagar Haveli, India to consider and dispose of the application of the company dated 16th May, 2001 and 20th Sept., 2001. In view of such interim order of this Court passed in the present appeal, dated 2nd April, 2003, the company has received the total refund amount of Rs. 44 Crores and no amount was withheld by the authorities. 6. When this appeal was taken up for hearing, Addl. Solicitor General, appearing for the revenue ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... earlier circular No. 258/92/96-CX, dated 30th Oct., 1996, issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs being incorrect, it was replaced by current circular dated 13th Feb., 2003. Therefore, the calculation earlier made on the basis of circular dated 30th Oct., 1996 was incorrect, which has to be recalculated in the light of the present circular dated 13th Feb., 2003. It was brought to the notice of this Court that in many matters, CEGAT, while dealt with similar matters, where duty demand was confirmed relying on Board's Circular No. 258/92/96-CX, dated 30th Oct., 1996, having noticed subsequent Circular F. No. 692/8/2003-CX, dated 13th Feb., 2003, by which earlier circular was modified, waived the pre-deposit of the duty and penalty ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ective of their year of assessment, it is to be calculated in the appropriate manner, i.e., in the manner as now correctly reflected in the circular dated 13th Feb., 2003 and not in the manner it was instructed vide circular dated 30th Oct., 1996, old circular having found to be incorrect has been superceded. 8. Now, the only question raised is whether CEGAT was justified under the law by directing the petitioner-company to deposit a sum of Rs. 15 Crores as pre-deposit. 9. It has not been disputed that u/s 35-F there is a pre-requisite to deposit demand amount or penalty against which a person has preferred appeal, but in any particular case the appellate authority or the Appellate Tribunal, if it is of the opinion that the deposit of....