Sun Pharmaceuticals Ind. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Sun Pharmaceuticals Ind. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Apr 23, 2004

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/35053

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/35053
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: J Balasundaram, A M Moheb
Decided On: Apr 23, 2004
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sun Pharmaceuticals Ind. Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Excerpt

.....the duty demand has been confirmed as a result of holding that inputs, intermediate products and finished excisable goods (bulk drugs and chemicals) were cleared from the store department to p.d.lab, r & d department, rejection outside the factory and branch transfer without reversal of appropriate modvat credit and without payment of duty. the extended period of limitation has been invoked on the ground of non disclosure by the applicants of such removal. the plea raised before us is that the stay order dated 15.10.03 was received by them only on 21.11.03, they applied for modification, the appeal was dismissed without considering the application and that too prior to the expiry of the time granted for pre-deposit viz. 15 days from the date of receipt of the stay order.the further plea is that duty is not payable as the goods removed to p.d.lab and r&d department are eligible for modvat credit. they also plead that the extended period is not available to the department and hence seek waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.3. the prayer is opposed by the ld.d.r. who reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority both on merits and time bar.4. a careful consideration of the rival submissions leads us to the view that no strong prima facie case for total waiver has been made out in view of the clear finding on removal both within and outside the factory without payment of duty and without reversal of credit. the plea on limitation is also arguable in the face of the factual position that the applicants never informed the department about the removal of their goods. in these circumstances, we direct pre-deposit of rs. 3,50,000/- (rupees three lakhs and fifty thousand) within a period of 8 weeks from today. on such deposit, pre-deposit of balance duty and penalty shall stand dispensed with and recovery thereof stayed, pending disposal of the appeal. failure to comply with this direction shall result in vacation of stay and dismissal of appeal,.....

Full Judgment

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 13,91,439/-and penalty of equal amount arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise(Appeals) who has dismissed the assessee's appeal on the ground of non compliance with the direction for pre-deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs contained in his interim order dated 15.10.2003.

2. We have heard both sides. The duty demand has been confirmed as a result of holding that inputs, intermediate products and finished excisable goods (bulk drugs and chemicals) were cleared from the store department to P.D.Lab, R & D department, rejection outside the factory and branch transfer without reversal of appropriate modvat credit and without payment of duty. The extended period of limitation has been invoked on the ground of non disclosure by the applicants of such removal. The plea raised before us is that the stay order dated 15.10.03 was received by them only on 21.11.03, they applied for modification, the appeal was dismissed without considering the application and that too prior to the expiry of the time granted for pre-deposit viz. 15 days from the date of receipt of the stay order.

The further plea is that duty is not payable as the goods removed to P.D.Lab and R&D department are eligible for modvat credit. They also plead that the extended period is not available to the department and hence seek waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

3. The prayer is opposed by the ld.D.R. who reiterates the findings of the Adjudicating Authority both on merits and time bar.

4. A careful consideration of the rival submissions leads us to the view that no strong prima facie case for total waiver has been made out in view of the clear finding on removal both within and outside the factory without payment of duty and without reversal of credit. The plea on limitation is also arguable in the face of the factual position that the applicants never informed the department about the removal of their goods. In these circumstances, we direct pre-deposit of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs and Fifty thousand) within a period of 8 weeks from today. On such deposit, pre-deposit of balance duty and penalty shall stand dispensed with and recovery thereof stayed, pending disposal of the appeal. Failure to comply with this direction shall result in Vacation of stay and dismissal of appeal, without prior notice.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Sun Pharmaceuticals Ind. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Cen. Excise Same Subject Excise Same Judge J Balasundaram, A M Moheb