Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.29 seconds)
Micro Village Communications Pvt. Ltd. vs The Commissioner Of Customs on 27 February, 2006 cites

Commissioner Of Customs vs United Telecom Ltd. on 20 January, 2006

11. We have gone through the records of the case carefully. The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, in the McDowell case as well the United Telecom case has emphasized the point that financial hardship should be examined for deciding waiver of pre-deposit even if there is a prima facie strong case on merits. In the Stay Order dated 7.11.2005, there is no discussion of the financial hardship pleaded by the appellants.
Karnataka High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 2 - D V Kumar - Full Document

M.I. Metal Sections Pvt. Ltd. vs Collector Of C. Excise, Bangalore on 28 October, 1994

10. The learned SDR strongly opposed the modification petition for the Stay Order. He said that it is not correct to say that the Tribunal has not considered the financial hardship because in para 6 of the Stay Order, the Tribunal has stated that "Having regard to the facts and circumstances, payment of Rs. 9,40,20,482/- is ordered, which is only half the amount of the total demand of Rs. 19,05,40,964/-". He also said that the appellants have not made out a strong case for waiver of pre-deposit as observed by the Tribunal in para 2 to 5 of the Stay Order. He also invited our attention to the observations of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of M/s. MI Metal Sections Pvt Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore wherein it is observed that "Merely because there is no elaborate discussion and detailed reasons are not given, it cannot be said that the plea of financial hardship has not been properly considered by the Tribunal."
Karnataka High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 7 - G T Nanavati - Full Document

Sri Ranga Industries vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 January, 1993

8. Our attention was also drawn to para 6 of the Stay Order wherein there is no discussion regarding the financial hardship at all. Our attention was also drawn to certain judicial decisions. The Hon'ble High Court of Madras, in the case of Ranga Industries v. Collector of Central Excise 1992 (57) ELT 603(Mad.) modified the Tribunal's order fixing Rs. 5 lakhs as pre-deposit by reducing the same to Rs. 2 lakhs in view of the fact that the financial aspect of the appellant was not considered by the Tribunal while fixing the amount.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Mcdowell And Co. Ltd. vs Cce on 20 June, 2005

11. We have gone through the records of the case carefully. The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, in the McDowell case as well the United Telecom case has emphasized the point that financial hardship should be examined for deciding waiver of pre-deposit even if there is a prima facie strong case on merits. In the Stay Order dated 7.11.2005, there is no discussion of the financial hardship pleaded by the appellants.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 6 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1