Ashok Jain vs Commissioner Of Central Excise
2011 Latest Caselaw 199 Del

46.
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      W.P.(C) 204/2011

       ASHOK JAIN                            ..... Petitioner
                              Through Mr. R.K. Handoo & Mr. Yoginder
                              Handoo, Advocates.

                     versus

       COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE ..... Respondent
                   Through Mr. Satish Kumar, Sr. Standing
                   Counsel.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

                ORDER

% 13.01.2011

Heard Mr. R.K. Handoo, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Mr. Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the Central Excise.

2. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, the

petitioner has prayed for issue a writ of certiorari for quashing of the

order No. 849-852/10/excise dated 1st November, 2010 whereby the

tribunal directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.4 crores as a condition

precedent for hearing of the appeal.

3. It is submitted by Mr. R.K. Handoo, learned counsel for the

petitioner that the tribunal has fallen into grave error by not waiving

the entire amount and directing such a huge sum to be deposited. It is

urged by him that the tribunal has misinterpreted the concept of

handicap as enshrined in the provision inasmuch as the said aspect in

its ambit and sweep would include the merits of the case as well as the

financial hardship.

4. Mr. Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the Revenue Department

has submitted that entire demand, including the penalty is more than

Rs.10 crores and, therefore, the amount that has been directed to be

deposited by the tribunal cannot be flawed.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the

considered opinion that cause of justice would be best subserved if the

petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.2.5 crores by end of April, 2011

and on such deposition being made, the tribunal shall proceed to hear

the appeal. If in the meantime the tribunal has dismissed the appeal, on

such deposit being made, the same shall stand revived and be dealt

with on merits.

6. With the aforesaid modification in the order of the tribunal, the

writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

CHIEF JUSTICE

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

JANUARY 13, 2011 VKR