- (1.) This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 12211 and 12337 of 2012 as identical issues are involved in both the petitions. For brevity, the facts are being taken from CWP No. 12211 of 2012.
(2.) This petition has been filed against the stay order dated 9.2.2012 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Tribunal, New Delhi (in short "the Tribunal") holding that the appeal of the petitioner would be dismissed automatically without any further hearing in the case on account of non-deposit of an amount of Rs. 2.5 crores by M/s Vishwakarma Alloys Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "M/s VAL") as directed in the impugned order dated 9.2.2012 and order dated 8.5.2012 (Annexure P-4) directing the petitioner to deposit the whole amount of penalty imposed by the respondent-Commissioner.
(3.) The facts relevant for disposal of the present writ petition are that the petitioner is a dealer, trading in duty paid iron and steel products. The goods sold by it are the raw material for their buyers and are used by them for the manufacture of their final products i.e. Iron and steel products. The buyers claimed Cenvat Credit of the duty on the basis of the invoices issued by the petitioner. During the financial years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05, the petitioner had, inter alia, sold a quantity of 1091.490 MTS of melting scrap, i.e. Slabs of assorted lengths, cobbles, sheer cuttings and defective blooms involving Cenvat Credit of Rs. 22,27,245/- to a furnace unit M/s VAL. A show cause notice dated 3.9.2007 (Annexure P-1) was issued calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 be not imposed upon it. It was also mentioned in the show cause notice that the petitioner and other dealers have only supplied invoices to M/s VAL and have not sold the material. The reply to the said show cause notice was filed. Respondent No.2 vide order dated 6.5.2010 (Annexure P-2) imposed a penalty of Rs. 22,27,245/-, i.e. equal to the amount of cenvat credit involved on the goods supplied by it. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner as well as M/s VAL and various other dealers and transporters filed appeals before the Tribunal. Along with the appeals, stay applications were also filed. The said applications came up for hearing on 9.2.2012 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 9.2.2012 (Annexure P-3) directed M/s VAL to make pre- deposit of Rs. 2.5 crores within a period of eight weeks. However, the requirement of pre-deposit in the case of all the dealers was dispensed with and it was ordered that in case M/s VAL fails to make pre-deposit, the appeals of all the parties would stand automatically dismissed. M/s VAL failed to deposit the amount. On misc. application having been filed by the revenue, the matter of the petitioner as well as other parties was taken up by the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 8.5.2012 (Annexure P-4) directed the petitioner and others to deposit the penalty amount imposed on them within four weeks. Hence, the present writ petition against the impugned orders dated 9.2.2012 and 8.5.2012.;