Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. A Director of the petitioner-company in his affidavit filed in support of the writ petition states as follows :-

"... the Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum, by order dated 13-3-1996 held that the petitioner was not entitled to Modvat credit as LABSA had not been declared as an input by the petitioner. Accordingly, the total demand of Rs. 1,55,77,740/- was directed to be paid forthwith by the petitioner. Against this order, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 35B of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 to the first respondent herein. Stay applications under Section 35F for waiver of pre-deposit were also filed. The said stay applications were posted for hearing on 28-6-1996. The petitioner had appointed Mr. Ashok Gupta, the Law Officer of the company, as its duly constituted attorney to appear in the matter. The said Mr. Ashok Gupta was indisposed on account of severe lower back pain on 28-6-1996. Therefore, by application dated 28-6-1996, the petitioner sought an adjournment of the proceedings from the first respondent and the first respondent was pleased to grant an adjournment and post the matter for hearing on 3-7-1996. However, Mr. Ashok Gupta did not recover from his ailment by that date. Therefore, the petitioner filed another application dated 2-7-1996 in the said stay applications seeking a further adjournment of the hearing and requested that the case may be posted on 5-7-1996 or any other dated convenient to the Hon'ble Tribunal. A medical certificate from Dr. T. Rajagopal, Chief Medical Officer of the petitioner was enclosed with the application for adjournment stating that Mr. Ashok Gupta required further rest till 5-7-1996 to recover from his acute lower back ache problem. In spite of the filing of the application for adjournment with the medical certificate, the first respondent herein refused to adjourn the case on 3-7-1996. Instead, the first respondent proceeded to decide the matter on merits and dismissed the stay application by staying that the petitioner has not provided any evidence that LABSA is the same Sulphonic Acid. The first respondent has directed the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of the entire duty demanded by the department, viz., a sum of Rs. 1,55,77,740/- forthwith."