Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


M/S Dewan Sugar Ltd v. Commissioner (Appeal) Central Excise & Another - WRIT TAX No. 1502 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 5137 (28 October 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court no.55

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1502 of 2005.

M/S Dewan Sugar Latd., Meerut.   Petitioner.


Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Meerut-II & another.   Respondents.


Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

In the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22nd September, 2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Meerut-II on the application under section 35-F of the Act by which the appellate authority has directed the petitioner to deposit 25 percent of the amount of penalty which relates to seven appeals. The 25 percent of the total amount comes to Rs.87, 44,392/-.

penalty orders have been passed for the various months for non-deposit of the amount of duty in accordance to Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 within the specified time. However, the petitioner stated that the amount of duty has subsequently been deposited along with the interest. Against the penalty order, petitioner filed appeals before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Meerut-II along with the applications under section 35-F of the Act for the waiver of the pre-deposit of the penalty. All the applications have been disposed of by the common order dated 22nd September, 2005 and the petitioner has been directed to deposit 25 percent of the total amount.

Heard counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the validity of the Rule 25 of the Rules has been challenged in the of writ petition no.706 of 2005 M/S A.V. Values Versus Union of India. The writ petition has been entertained and is pending. He further submitted that the entire amount of duty has been deposited along with the interest and only on account of non-deposit of the duty within the specified time; in accordance to Rule 25 the penalty has been levied. He further submitted that the petitioner company is running in great financial crises and the reference under section 15 (1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision Act), 1985 has been admitted by the Board. Copy of the letter dated 3rd February, 2005 in this regard is Annexure-6 to the writ petition. He submitted that in case, if the petitioner is compelled to deposit the amount as directed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the business of the petitioner shall be effected.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) requires modification. The amount of Rs.87,44,392/- is substituted by Rs.25 lacs. Petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 25 lacs within two weeks from today. On the deposit of the amount, the Commissioner (Appeals) is directed to decide the appeal expeditiously on merit.

In the result, writ petition is allowed in part. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 22nd September, 2005 is modified to the extent, as stated above.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.