CWP No. 14385 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 14385 of 2011 Date of Decision: 9.8.2011 M/s Singhal Strips Ltd. ....Petitioner. Versus Union of India and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. By way of instant petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the order dated 11.7.2011 (Annexure P-10) passed by respondent No.2 whereby the petitioner has been asked to make a deposit of huge amount as a pre-condition for hearing of the appeal. 2. The facts as narrated in the petition are that the petitioner is registered with Central Excise Department for manufacture of CR Strips from HR Coils and avails cenvat credit on HR Coils and utilize it for payment of duty on CR strips. On 16.12.2005, DGECI carried out a CWP No. 14385 of 2011 -2- search on the premises of the petitioner-company. During search, certain records including invoices and account statements of the petitioner were resumed. On 1.6.2007, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner stating that it had availed cenvat credit of Rs.40,54,339/- which was recoverable under the Cenvat Credit Rules (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”). The petitioner was asked to produce the records of the company. The petitioner could not produce the records as the same were lying with the Commissionerate. On 22.4.2008, the petitioner filed reply to the show cause notice pleading that the notice was false and not supported by any evidence. It prayed that the demand raised be quashed. The Joint Commissioner, Rohtak, vide order dated 30.1.2009 (Annexure P-1) upheld the demand of cenvat credit of Rs.40,54,339/- and imposed a penalty under Rule 13 of the Rules. Further, penalties of Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.40,000/- were also imposed on the accountant and the authorized signatory, respectively in their individual capacity under Rules 26 and 27 of the Central Excise Rules. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) who dismissed the appeal. On further appeal before the Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal along with an application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty and grant of stay, the Tribunal vide order dated 23.4.2010 (Annexure P-6) allowed the petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs.16,00,000/- within six weeks. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application dated 25.5.2010 for modification of the stay order on various grounds. The said application was dismissed by respondent No.2 vide order dated 11.7.2011. However, time to deposit the amount was CWP No. 14385 of 2011 -3- extended upto 10.8.2011. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. The petitioner is seeking exercise of discretion in its favour by directing respondent No.2 to waive or reduce the pre-deposit as a condition precedent for hearing of the appeal. According to the learned counsel, the duty quantified amounts to Rs.40,54,339/-, out of which Rs.4,00,000/- already stands paid and the petitioner has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs.16,00,000/- more. He submits that in view of the precarious financial condition of the petitioner, the amount of pre- deposit may be suitably reduced. 5. We do not find any substance in the aforesaid submission. A perusal of order dated 23.4.2010, Annexure P-6, whereby the petitioner has been required to deposit a further sum of Rs.16,00,000/- depicts that it was on the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was willing to pay another amount of Rs.16,00,000/- without prejudice to the contentions raised in the appeal that the Tribunal had directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.16,00,000/- in addition to Rs.4,00,000/- already deposited. Once there was statement of the counsel for the petitioner showing its willingness to make deposit of Rs.16,00,000/-, no occasion arises for variation of the aforesaid amount by this Court. 6. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the time allowed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure P-10 is expiring on 10.8.2011, the petitioner may be given extension of time in depositing the said amount. 7. In the interest of justice, we allow one month's time from CWP No. 14385 of 2011 -4- today to deposit the amount in terms of order dated 23.4.2010 (Annexure P-6). The amount be now deposited on or before 9.9.2011. 8. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE August 9, 2011 (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) gbs ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE