TMI Blog1992 (8) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondents. [Order per: PC. Jain, Member (T)]. Learned advocate Shri C.S. Lodha for the applicants prays for the waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of Rs.19,69,854.00 demanded as duty and of Rs. 50,000/- imposed as personal penalty on M/s Indo Fab Engineers and Rs. 30,000/- imposed as penalty on the second applicant Hindustan Lever Ltd. The aforesaid amount of duty comprise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Fraser Ltd. [1990 (46) E.L.T. 562 (Tri.)] as also by several other judgments, namely: 1. Aruna Industries v C.C.E - 1986 (25) E.L.T. 580 (Tri.) 2. S.A.I.L. v. C.C.E.- 1988 (36) E.L.T. 316 3. Standard Industrial Engg. Co. v. C.C.E. - 1988 (38) E.L.T. 196 (Tri.) 4. Pratap Steel Rolling Mills - 1990 (48) E.L.T. 538 (Tri.). He has further submitted that the adjudicating authority has gone be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ld. JDR Shri M.S. Arora, on the other hand submits that the show cause notice makes a clear allegation that members for steel structures in factory premises at site were fabricated and then they were taken to the erection place where they have been built into structures. He submits that the contention of the ld. advocate that there is no pre-fabrication of the parts of the structures is not co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a facie case and therefore, the stay petitions be dismissed. 4. In his rejoinder, Shri Lodha submits that the contentions of the ld. JDR that the data was not supplied in time is not borne out by para 2 of the show cause notice dated 15-11-1989 where it is admitted by the department that a separate case for the period June 1987 to 15-5-1989 has been filed separately for the quantity of goods of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly complicated nature of the question involved, we cannot say either way whether there is prima facie case either in favour of the department or in favour of the assessee. We are of the view having regard to the overall evidence on record and the facts on record that the balance of convenience would lie in favour of the applicants in not getting any pre-deposit made at this stage. In view of the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
