Once appellant pays mandatory amount prescribed u/s 35F of CEA, 1944, no separate order of Stay is required for balance amount of demand
THE new section 35F of the CEA, 1944 as substituted by the Finance Act, 2014 has had its fair share of its interpretational controversies. Some seem to have been extinguished while others have been swept under the carpet to be taken care of, as the English proverb goes - Don't cross the bridge until you come to it!
The apprehensions emanating from the TRU letter D.O.F.No.334/15/2014-TRU dated 10th July,2014 covered exhaustively in this column & by various writers on our portal were assuaged to an extent by the Board Circular dated 16.09.2014 and later when the CESTAT came out with its own Circulars dated 28th August, 2014 and 14th October, 2014.
Few issues still remain and would continue to. One such issue came to notice recently.
In this case the appellant deposited the mandatory amount as prescribed under the new section 35F of the CEA, 1944. But the appellant had a few doubts -
+ What about the dues adjudged in excess of that paid in terms of section 35F?
+ Whether the recovery of the said balance amount should also be got stayed by the CESTAT or is it deemed to be stayed?
Knowing that clarifications would be hard to come, the assessee filed Miscellaneous applications before the CESTAT seeking stay of the balance amount of impugned demand confirmed against them by the CCE.
The matter was heard recently.
The Bench observed - "… The appellants state that they have deposited the mandatory amount as required under section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In this view of the matter, no separate order of stay is required under the mandatory statute. Thus, the miscellaneous applications filed for withdrawing the stay applications are allowed and the same are dismissed as withdrawn."