9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sr.Standing MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. Admit. 2. Issue notice. Mr.Satish Kumar, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent. 3. The question of law urged by the appellant is: "Whether in the instant case the direction of the CESTAT to deposit Rs.5 crores as pre-condition for the hearing of the appeal was justified." 4. The Appellant's composite manufacturing unit is h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bombay High Court reported as Niphad Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CEE, 2014 (300) E.L.T. 66 (Bom.). The Court on that occasion observed as follows: "In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and direct the Tribunal to decide the stay application afresh. However, while considering the stay application both the decisions of the Tribunal in the matter of Ugar Sugar Works Ltd. referred to her ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an alcohol strength by volume of 80% vol. or higher. It is then contended that since there is no mention of products which the assessee is concerned with and therefore it is not entitled to the credits claimed since the goods are not excisable. Prima facie, it appears that revenue's argument is at loggerheads with the notification. As noticed by the Bombay High Court in its rulling in Niphad Sakh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
