2010 (11) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ENT P.C: 1. Heard. Admit on the following substantial question of law. "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the appellants to deposit Rs.5 Crores under Section 35F of the Act? 2. The short question raised in this appeal is, whether the tower on which the antenna is mounted by the appellant constitutes capital goods for the purpose of Rule .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... totally different from the questions raised in the present case. Whether construction of a tower on which antenna is mounted constitutes capital goods or not was not the question considered in those two cases. In these circumstances, without going into the merits of the case, in our opinion interest of justice would be met by directing the CESTAT to dispose off the appeal which is the subject mat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X