- (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 07.01.2014 (Annexure A -6) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), claiming the following substantial questions of law: - (i) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was correct in directing the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.10 lac without considering the fact that they were eligible for the benefit of Small Scale Exemption? (ii) Whether the Tribunal is correct in not allowing the benefit of Cenvat Credit on inputs used in the manufacture of finished goods on which duty is being demanded? (iii) Whether the Tribunal was correct in not even discussing the pleas taken by the appellants and without considering the same and passing a non -speaking order? (iv) Whether the Tribunal is correct in directing the appellants to deposit such a huge amount when the appellants have a prima facie case in their favour?
(2.) THE facts, in brief, necessary for adjudication of the present appeal as narrated therein are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of goods. A show cause notice dated 18.8.2009 (Annexure A -1) was issued by the respondent proposing to demand duty of Rs. 29,65,211/ - for the period from August, 2007 to February, 2008. The respondent vide Order -in -Original dated 3.3.2009 (Annexure A -2) confirmed the demand of Rs. 29,65,211/ - and imposed the penalty of an equal amount. Aggrieved by the order dated 3.3.2009 (Annexure A -2), the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide Order -in -Appeal dated 16.1.2013 (Annexure A -3) dismissed the appeal. Still dissatisfied, the appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal. Along with the appeal, the appellant also filed stay application. The Tribunal vide order dated 7.1.2014 (Annexure A -6) directed the appellant to make a pre -deposit of Rs. 10 lacs as a pre -condition to hear the appeal on merits. Hence, the present appeal. It may be observed that the appellant has filed two appeals bearing CEA Nos. 8 and 9 of 2014. It appears that the impugned order of CEA No. 8 of 2014 has been appended in CEA No.9 of 2014 and vice versa.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submitted that the requirement of Rs. 10 lacs as a pre -deposit by the Tribunal in the present case was excessive. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we do not find any merit in the appeal. The Tribunal while directing the appellant to deposit Rs. 10 lacs as a pre -deposit for hearing of the appeal has noticed as under: - "There are bundle of facts to be settled in the present appeal to hold whether there was a substantial expansion made or not. Prima facie we consider difficulties of both sides. To work out an interim modality, appellant is directed to deposit Rs.10.00 Lakhs within 8 weeks from today and make compliance on 14.03.2014.";