A.K. Banerjee, J. - (1.) On November 30, 1997 Commissioner of Central Excise passed an order as against the appellant demanding a sum of Rs. 33,36,289.00 by way of duty, Rs. 7.00 lacs by way of penalty and interest under Sec. 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act of 1944"). The appellant filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "CEGAT"). To prefer an appeal from the order of the Commissioner the appellant was required to deposit the amount so directed to be paid on protest. The appellant, however, did not deposit the disputed amount and filed an application for dispensation of the deposit. The Tribunal heard the said application and admitted the appeal on condition that the appellant must deposit Rs. 5.00 lacs towards duty, Rs. 2.00 lacs towards penalty and Rs. 11.00 lacs by adjustment of the amount if available in Modvat Account. The rest of the demand was stayed by the tribunal. The appellant filed another application for modification, inter alia, praying for dispensation of such deposit. The tribunal refused to modify the said order and only extended the period for such deposit. On December 31,1998 the appellant deposited a sum of Rs. 1,11,072.00. By this time the Central Government introduced the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Scheme"). On January 8,1999 the appellant filed an application before the tribunal expressing their desire to settle the disputes under the said Scheme. The appellant also filed a declaration as required under Sec. 88 of the Finance Act, 1998. Since the total amount as adjudicated upon by the Commissioner was Rs. 33,36,289.00 and the appellant paid a sum of Rs. 1,11,072.00 the unpaid duty was Rs. 32,25,217.00. The appellant offered to pay Rs. 16,12,609.00 being 50% of the unpaid duty. Such declaration was, however, not accepted by the designated authority under the said scheme. The designated authority passed an order on February 10, 1999 holding that the appellant was already directed by the tribunal to make pre -deposit of Rs. 14,88,928.00 (being the balance of Rs. 16.00 lacs) at the time of admission of the appeal and such amount should not be included in the disputed tax for the purpose of finding out the actual amount payable under the scheme. The Tribunal held that since the appellant failed to deposit the said sum of Rs. 1,44,88,928/ - (sic) being the remaining amount of Rs. 16.00 lacs so directed by the Tribunal the said amount should be paid by the appellant in addition to 50% of the balance amount being Rs. 18,47,361.00. In terms of the order of the designated authority the appellant was required to pay Rs. 26,12,689/ - (Rs. 16.00 lacs - Rs. 1,11,072.00 = Rs. 14,88,928.00 + Rs. 9,23,681.00).
(2.) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of the designated authority the appellant filed the instant writ petition. The same was heard and disposed of by the learned Single Judge by His Lordship's judgment and order dated April 4, 2003. His Lordship held that the designated authority correctly adjudicated the amount under the said scheme and there was no scope for interference. The appellant, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment by His Lordship, filed the instant appeal.
(3.) We have heard the parties. We have perused the written notes of submission submitted on behalf of the parties.;