- (1.) The petitioner has assailed the order dated 8th May, 2014 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short "CESTAT"), Kolkata disposing of an application for stay filed in connection with the Customs Appeal No. C/A 187-193/2010 directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 1.14 crores as condition precedent for maintaining the appeal.
(2.) Challenging the order of the adjudicating officer the said appeal came to be filed at the instance of the petitioner raising various issues including the issue that the petitioner's company has been referred to Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (in short "BIFR") and, therefore, the action for recovery of the amount is impermissible.
(3.) By an earlier order dated 13th November, 2013 passed by the CESTAT the same amount was directed to be deposited by the petitioner, which was assailed before this Court in W.P. 939 (W) of 2014. The attention of this Court was drawn to a judgement of the Apex Court in case of Sagarika Acoustronics Private Limited v. Union of India,2010 256 ELT 61, for the proposition that once the company has been referred to BIFR, the Tribunal while considering an application for stay should record its findings on the net-worth of the company. After noticing the earlier judgement rendered by the Supreme Court in case of Metal Box India Limited v. Collector of Central Excise, Mumbai, 2003 155 ELT 13, wherein it is held that Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (in short "SICA") does not put a fetter in taking an action for recovery of the customs duties or excise duties against the company, who has gone before the BIFR.;