- (1.) By the writ petitions, a challenge has been made to second proviso to Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The connected appeals challenge the order passed by the Commissioner or the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).
(2.) After arguing the case to some length, validity of second proviso to Section 35F of the Act of 1944 is not pressed in view of the fact that the court has considered alternative prayer to make condition of pre-deposit to be reasonable thus to interfere in the order passed by the Commissioner/CESTAT. The application for exemption from the condition of pre-deposit has been decided vide impugned orders. The assessee has been asked to deposit upto 50% of the amount of duty as pre-deposit for hearing of appeal though, in few cases, it is on lower side. As per the amendment by the Finance Act, 2014 the pre-deposit is kept limited to 7.5% of the demand to maintain an appeal.
(3.) We have accordingly considered the alternative prayer. The condition of pre-deposit to maintain an appeal was existing prior to amendment also, however, with a provision to seek exemption by maintaining an application by the assessee. The Commissioner/CESTAT, while accepting the application/s in part, directed the assessee to deposit the amount of duty at a higher rate than provided under the Finance Act, 2014.;