By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, AUG 05, 2014: AGAINST an order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner(A), Mumbai, the appellant filed an appeal before the CESTAT. This was in the year 2006.

The Registry issued a SCN to the appellant directing them to file a Stay application.

In response to the SCN, the appellant submitted that in the earlier round of litigation, the matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority and they have already paid duty confirmed along with a penalty amount of Rs.15,00,000/-. And in that proceeding, the adjudicating authority had reduced the penalty to Rs.2,50,000/-. Inasmuch as since the amount in dispute has already been paid, therefore, stay application is not required to be filed as per Section 35F of the CEA, 1944, the appellant averred.

The matter was heard recently.

The Division Bench held -

"3. As the disputed amount has already been deposited by the appellant, therefore, we are of the view that the appellant has complied with the provisions of section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In the circumstance, the appellant is not required to file stay application for consideration. The show-cause notice issued to the appellant is discharged."

(See 2014-TIOL-1426-CESTAT-MUM)