SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 421

2003(4) Supreme 509
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ruma Pal and B.N. Srikrishna, JJ.
Mehsana Dist. Co-Op. Milk P.U. Ltd. -Appellant
versus
Union of India -Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2668 of 2003
Decided on 31-3-2003

IMPORTANT POINT
Order directing deposit of an amount by way of pre-deposit under Section 35F Central Excise Act has to be passed considering merits of appeal and then considering financial hardship and other relevant factors.

Headnote:Central Excise Act, 1944-Section 35F-Order by Commissioner (Appeals) directing deposit of Rs. 30 lakhs by way of pre-deposit-Order passed without considering merits of appeal and concentrating upon prima facie balance of convenience-Appellate authority should have addressed its mind to prima facie merits of appeal and determine quantum of deposit considering financial hardship and other relevant factors-Impugned order as well as order of High Court were liable to be set aside. (Para 2)

       

ORDER

Leave granted.

2. The issue here relates to the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise and Customs, under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. By the impugned order, the appellants have been directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 30 lakhs by way of pre-deposit. The reasoning given in support of such order is wholly unsatisfactory. The appellate authority has not at all considered the prima facie merits and has concentrated upon the prima facie balance of convenience in the case. The Appellate Authority should have addressed its mind to the prima facie merits of the appellants case and upon being satisfied of the same determined the quantum of deposit taking into consideration the financial hardship and other such relevant factors.

3. We accordingly set aside the decision of the High Court as well as the impugned order dated 14.8.2002 and remand the matter back to the appellate authority for redetermining the issue under Section 35F of the Act after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

4. The appeal is allowed without any order as to costs.

Appeal allowed and matter remanded.

*****************

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top