JUDGEMENT
Rajes Kumar, J. -
(1.) Present writ petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 28th October, 2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Meerut-II by which the appeals filed by the petitioner have been rejected for want of deposit of the tax.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the penalty orders have been passed for various months for non-deposit of the amount of duty in accordance to Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 during specified time. Against the said orders, appeals have been filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs and Central Excise, Meerut-II. Along with the appeals, applications under section 35-F of the Central Excise Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") were filed. The said application under section 35-F of the Act was allowed in part and the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise vide single order dated 22nd September, 2005 directed the petitioner to deposit 25 percent of the total amount levied within one month which comes to Rs.87,44,392/-. The amount was to be deposited by 22nd October, 2005. The petitioner challenged the order dated 22nd September, 2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs and Central Excise, Meerut-II on the application under section 35-F of the Act in writ petition no.1502 of 2005. The writ petition was allowed in part and the order dated 22nd September, 2005 was modified to the extent that instead of deposit of Rs. 87,44,392/-, the court directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 25 lacs within two weeks from 28th October, 2005. It appears that the order passed by this Court dated 28th October, 2005 could not be communicated to the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs and Central Excise, Meerut-II, thus, he rejected all the appeals vide order dated 28th October, 2005 for non-deposit of the amount as directed by order dated 22nd September, 2005.
(3.) Heard Sri Vivek Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.C. Sinha, Assistant Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the opposite party.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.