2005 (4) TMI 419

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... R, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J) (Oral)]. - There is a demand of duty of Rs. 54,21,354/- on the appellants for the period March, 2000 to March, 2002. There is also a penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs on them. The appellants pray for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of these amounts. 2. Ld. Consultant for the appellants submits that the demand of duty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lly stated in the impugned order that, in the case of this assessee, the concept of job worker being manufacturer is inapplicable. All these findings have become handy for the assessee to claim a strong prima facie case against the demand of duty. We, therefore, grant waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the duty and penalty amounts. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X