Sulochana Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of C. Ex. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- order1. this writ petition is directed against the order dated 10-12-1990 made by the second respondent - collector of central excise (appeals) on the question of waiver of deposit and stay. 2. the order, which was appealed against, imposed a duty of rs. 2,67,577.90 on the petitioner. the second respondent has considered only the financial status of the petitioner, but has not considered the merits of the case or whether the petitioner has a prima facie case in the appeal. the collector, therefore, directed payment of rs. 2,00,000/-. 3. i have heard mr. c. natarajan, learned counsel for the petitioner and he contends that the question related to re-classification and the same can be done only under limited circumstances. i have also heard mr. jayachandran, counsel for the respondents. i have always pointed out that in matter of waiver of deposit, the appellate authority should exercise judicial discretion and cannot set only on the capability of the parties. having given my anxious consideration to rival submissions, i direct that it is sufficient if the petitioner makes a deposit of rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) within three weeks from today as a condition for the hearing of the appeal. this writ petition is ordered in the above terms. there will be no order as to costs.

Judgment:
ORDER

1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 10-12-1990 made by the second respondent - Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) on the question of waiver of deposit and stay.

2. The order, which was appealed against, imposed a duty of Rs. 2,67,577.90 on the petitioner. The second respondent has considered only the financial status of the petitioner, but has not considered the merits of the case or whether the petitioner has a prima facie case in the appeal. The Collector, therefore, directed payment of Rs. 2,00,000/-.

3. I have heard Mr. C. Natarajan, learned counsel for the petitioner and he contends that the question related to re-classification and the same can be done only under limited circumstances. I have also heard Mr. Jayachandran, counsel for the respondents. I have always pointed out that in matter of waiver of deposit, the Appellate Authority should exercise judicial discretion and cannot set only on the capability of the parties. Having given my anxious consideration to rival submissions, I direct that it is sufficient if the petitioner makes a deposit of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) within three weeks from today as a condition for the hearing of the appeal. This writ petition is ordered in the above terms. There will be no order as to costs.