9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 857X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. ORDER On matter being called, the appellant is not present in spite of today's notice of hearing having been sent to them well in advance. Accordingly, we have heard ld. DR and have gone through the impugned order. 2. The prayer in the application is to dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 4,43,902/-. The said duty stands confirmed against the appellant in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Commissioner was appealed against by Revenue before Tribunal, but the stay filed by Revenue was rejected. The position would become clear from the observations made by Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order, reproduced below :- "I agree with the appellant's contention that the Adjudication Orders of the Commissioner, Central Excise, Ludhiana in A.P. Solvex case, as relied by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid order, we deem it fit to hold that the appellant has prima facie case in his favour. We accordingly dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of duty. At this stage we note that the issue must be having recurring effect as such we fix the present appeal, along with the earlier appeal of Revenue in the case of CCE v. M/s A.P. Solvex Ltd. on 2nd November 2011. (Dictated & pronounced in open Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
