Tribunal has no inherent power to put a condition for depositing an amount for adjudicating the case afresh
PrintListen to this Article
Tribunal has no inherent power to put a condition for depositing an amount for adjudicating the case afresh
We are sharing with you an important judgement of the Hon’ble High Court, Andhra Pradesh, in the case of Maa Mahamaya Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Visakhapatnam-I, Commissionerate [2014 (11) TMI 747 – Andhra Pradesh High Court] on following issue:
Issue:
Whether the Tribunal has inherent power like Civil Court to put a condition for depositing an amount for adjudicating the case afresh?
Facts & background:
In the instant case, a Show Cause Notice was issued by the Ld. Commissioner to Maa Mahamaya Industries Ltd. (“the Appellant”) and the same was adjudicated against the Appellant. Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble CESTAT.
The Hon’ble CESTAT after considering the facts and circumstances of the case found that the present appeal needed fresh hearing by the Ld. Commissioner. Accordingly the case was remanded back to the Ld. Commissioner with some specific directions, namely supply of materials and other things. Further, a direction was also given to the Appellant to deposit Rs. 5 crores as a condition for fresh adjudication.
Being aggrieved the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and contended that unlike Civil Court, the Hon’ble Tribunal has no jurisdiction to put a condition of depositing Rs. 5 crores as a pre-condition for adjudicating the matter afresh by the Ld. Commissioner.
On the other hand, the Department submitted that the Hon’ble Tribunal direction to deposit was as a measure of security and hence the aforesaid Order was passed to meet the ends of justice.
Held:
The Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that the Tribunal is a creature of a Statue with specific powers mentioned in the Statute itself and there is no provision under the Statue enabling the Tribunal to ask for depositing Rs. 5 crores for adjudication and the same is without jurisdiction.
Accordingly the Hon’ble High Court directed the Ld. Commissioner to adjudicate the matter without any deposit and it was further clarified that in any event, logically question of deposit does not arise unless there is an adjudication to suffer with the liability of the Appellant.
Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavors. In case of any query/ information, please do not hesitate to write back to us.
Thanks & Best Regards.
Bimal Jain
FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons)
Flat No. 34B, Ground Floor, Pocket - 1,
MayurVihar, Phase - I,
Delhi – 110091, India
Desktel: +91-11-22757595/ 42427056
Mobile: +91 9810604563
Email: bimaljain@hotmail.com
Category : Excise | Comments : 0 | Hits : 2846
The scheme of levy and collection of Central Excise duty on articles of Jewellery is as under: (a) The levy and collection of Central Excise Duty is on the manufacture of Jewellery (excluding silver Jewellery, not studded with diamonds, ruby, emerald or sapphire). (b) It is applicable to both branded as well as unbranded Jewellery. (c) The rate of duty on the Jewellery are as follows: (i) 1% on transaction value [without Cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods...
Clarifications on Excise imposed on Jewellery The strike by bullion traders and jewellers continued for the 8th day to protest the Budget proposal to impose one per cent excise duty(without input tax credit) on Jewellery, despite the Centre's assurance that it would look into the issue. Most Jewellery houses are closed since the finance minister Arun Jaitley in his Budget proposal on February 29 levied 1% excise duty on Jewellery. Striking associations in different part of the country h...
Dear Professional Colleague, No bar on admissibility of Cenvat credit either as Inputs or Capital goods at any stage of proceedings We are sharing with you an important judgment of the Hon’ble CESTAT, Kolkata in the case of Tata Steel Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur [(2016) 66 taxmann.com 76 (Kolkata - CESTAT)] on following issues: Issue: Whether rails and other track materials, namely, sleepers, paints and crossings etc. used for movement of raw materials, finish...
Cenvat credit admissible on services of sales commission agent Background: Even though the definition of ‘input services’ given under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (“the Credit Rules”) covers the services of sales promotion in its inclusive part, eligibility to avail Cenvat credit on the services rendered by a commission agent has been disputed recently because of divergent judgments and views of the Department. In this regard, the Hon’ble Punjab &...
Cenvat credit on input services availed prior to initiation of manufacturing activity is admissible Shree Cement Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur [2015 (63) taxmann.com 151 (New Delhi - CESTAT)] Facts: The Department denied the Cenvat credit on the ground that Shree Cement Ltd. (“the Appellant”) is not entitled to take Cenvat credit on Service tax on cargo handling service which has been distributed to the...
Comments