- (1.) These three Central Excise Appeals have been preferred under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order dated 27th May, 2009 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the "Appellate Tribunal") by which, each appellant has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 5 lacs. This order was passed on the stay applications filed by the appellants in Central Excise Appeals which were preferred by them against the order dated 27th November, 2008 passed by the Commissioner Central Excise, NOIDA.
(2.) The appellants in Central Excise Appeal Nos. 146 of 2009 and 147 of 2009 are the Directors of M/s. Lamicoat International Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "M/s. LIPL') while the appellant in Central Excise Appeal No. 148 is the Manager of M/s. LIPL. By the order dated 7th November, 2008, the Commissioner, Central Excise, NOIDA confirmed the demands of duty of Rs. 8,45,11,283/-, Rs. 15,68,167/-, Rs. 75,80,380/-, Rs. 14,70,682/- and Rs. 3,90,734/- and an equal amount of penalty against M/s. LIPL. By the same order penalty of Rs. 8 crores and 3 crores were imposed upon the Directors of M/s. LIPL and a penalty of Rs. 2.5 crores was also imposed upon the Manager of M/s. LIPL.
(3.) This order dated 7th November, 2008 led to the filing of the four Central Excise Appeals before the Appellate Tribunal. By a common order dated 12th May, 2009 the Appellate Tribunal has disposed of the stay applications filed by M/s. LIPL as well as the stay applications filed by the Directors and the Manager of M/s. LIPL with the following observations :- "We have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. There can be no dispute that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court declares the law as it was even earlier. In the present case, we find that duty on the metalized films and laminated polyester films have been duly assessed (assessed by the assessee and, for some period, by the Department also) and paid to the Central Govt.; the credit on inputs during the said period was also validly taken. In these circumstances, we are in agreement with submissions of the learned Advocate that demand under Section 11D and demand of Rs. 15,58,167/- in respect of inputs gone into exports and the demand of Rs. 75,80,380/- in respect of intermediate product may not be sustainable. However, the rest of the demands relates to clandestine removal which is not being disputed at the stay stage by the applicants. All the above observations are prima facie view taken for the purpose of disposal of the stay petitions. Therefore, we direct the applicant to deposit Rs. 18,61,416/- (rupees eighteen lakhs sixty one thousand four hundred sixteen) [Rs. 14,70,682/- + Rs. 3,90,734/-] towards duty within eight weeks from today and an amount of penalty of Rs. 18,61,416/- (rupees eighteen lakhs sixty one thousand four hundred sixteen) [Rs. 14,70,682/- + Rs. 3,90,734/-]....................The other applicants namely, Shri Lok Nath Prasad Gupta, Shri Om Prakash Gupta and Shri Dipanker Ghosh are directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs (rupees five lakhs) each within eight weeks from today. Subject to deposit of the above amounts, pre-deposits of the balance amount of duties, penalties and interests are waived and recovery thereof stayed till disposal of the appeals.";