Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Stanlek Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Stanlek Engineering Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise,

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Nov 05, 2001
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/26567

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Stanlek Engineering Pvt. Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Excerpt

1. it is brought to our notice by the ld.consultant for the applicants while arguing the application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of rs.1,43,815/- that the matter had been come up earlier by way of appeal to the tribunal which directed pre-deposit of rs. 20,000/- towards penalty and remanded the case for fresh decision on merits and the ld.consultant, therefore, submits that since this amount already stands paid by them consequent upon the tribunal's remand order, no further pre-deposit of penalty may be called for keeping in mind that the duty amount stands paid.2. the ld.departmental representative reiterates the findings of the authority below.3. having regard to the above submissions, we are of the view that no further pre-deposit should be called for and we, therefore, waive the pre-deposit of the penalty amount and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.

Full Judgment

1. It is brought to our notice by the ld.Consultant for the applicants while arguing the application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs.1,43,815/- that the matter had been come up earlier by way of appeal to the Tribunal which directed pre-deposit of Rs. 20,000/- towards penalty and remanded the case for fresh decision on merits and the ld.Consultant, therefore, submits that since this amount already stands paid by them consequent upon the Tribunal's remand order, no further pre-deposit of penalty may be called for keeping in mind that the duty amount stands paid.

2. The ld.departmental representative reiterates the findings of the authority below.

3. Having regard to the above submissions, we are of the view that no further pre-deposit should be called for and we, therefore, waive the pre-deposit of the penalty amount and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial