TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is no condition in Notification No. 2/2008 which restricts the application of the said notification in respect of the goods manufactured and cleared under the Notification No. 4/2006-C.E.; we also find strong force in the contention raised by the ld. Counsel that the order of this Bench in the case of Arvind Ltd. & Arvind Polycot [2011 (11) TMI 557 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] is essentially on the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 1,04,75,323/- confirmed as ineligible Cenvat credit availed by the appellant during the period July, 10 to April 11, interest thereof and penalty under provisions of Rule 15(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 2. Heard both sides and perused the case records. 3. It transpires from the records that the appellant herein is manufacturing medicaments which are dutiable as well as exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it, order in the case of M/s. Arvind Polycot Arvind Ltd. v. CCE, Ahmedabad in Stay Order No. S/1531-1532/WZB/AHD/2011, dated 21-11-2011 [2013 (297) E.L.T. 278 (Tri.-Ahmd.)], will cover issue. 4. On perusal of the said stay order and the records, we find that the appellant has made out a case for the waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts involved, as there is no condition in Notification No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
