TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty paid on the brass wire manufactured by the job worker and returned to the appellant. Thus appellant has a prima facie case for waiver of condition of pre-deposit. Stay application is, therefore, allowed and condition of pre-deposit of duty demands, interest and penalty is waived, for hearing of the appeal and recovery thereof is stayed till the disposal of the appeal - in favour of assessee. - 2762 of 2011 - 1606/2012-EX(BR) - Dated:- 19-9-2012 - Ajit Bharihoke And Rakesh Kumar, JJ. Appellants Rep by: Shri Ashok Dhingra, Adv., and Ms Sonia Gupta, Adv. Respondent Rep by: Shri Sanjay Jain, DR Per: Ajit Bharihoke: This is an application seeking waiver of condition of pre-deposit of the duty demand of Rs. 10,71,9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner (Appeals) vide impugned order. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellant pressing for waiver of condition of pre-deposit has submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable for the reason that it is based upon incorrect reading of the judgment of the Tribunal in the matter of Wyeth Laboratories Ltd. vs. CCE, Bombay reported in 2000 (120) E.L.T. 218 (Tribunal - LB). It is further contended that perusal of the aforesaid judgment would show that as per the aforesaid judgment, wherein interpretation of Rule 57F (2) and F (4) was subject matter of consideration, the majority view was that if the assessee sent scrap generated to job worker under Rule 57F (2) for reprocessing and return of the reprocessed material to the assessee for re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her the inputs nor partially processed inputs, it was only the waste and scrap. It is contended that as per the facts of this case, waste and scrap was input for the job worker and it was used for the brass wires and sent to the appellant as inputs for zip fasteners. Thus, it is contended that the impugned order cannot be faulted and there is no reason for waiver of condition of pre-deposit. 5. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The issue raised in this appeal is interpretation of Cenvat Credit Rule 4 (5) (a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, which requires serious consideration. Otherwise also as submitted by learned Counsel for the appellant, even if the argument of the respondent department is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
