TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 1279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mentary proof specifically indicating the value of the said goods and materials so sold by them - matter remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. - Writ Petition (MD) No. 15876 of 2014 and M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 3-4-2017 - T.S. Sivagnanam and P. Velmurugan, JJ. Shri P. Murugesan, for the Petitioner. Shri R. Nandakumar, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the petitioner has made out the prima facie case but observed that it has failed to make out a strong prima facie case for waiving the entire pre-deposit along with interest and penalty and therefore, the CESTAT directed the petitioner to pay pre-deposit amount of ₹ 15 lakhs. This order was challenged by the petitioner by filing this writ petition contending that the petitioner will not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that as against the said order, on 18-1-2017, the Hon ble Supreme Court has held in favour of the assessee and therefore, the case of the Safety Retreading Company (supra) is squarely applicable to the case on hand. 7. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent elaborately referred to the factual matrix and referred Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibunal for fresh consideration. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the CESTAT for fresh consideration and the Tribunal shall take into consideration as regards the applicability of the decision rendered by the Hon ble Supreme Court in C.A. No. 641 of 2012, dated 18-1-2017 in the case of Safety Retreading Company (supra) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
