9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1005X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 has been filed, is Rs. 48,736/-The amount deposited by the appellant, though after the delay of twenty days, is Rs. 2,52,717/-, which is the amount involved in appeal No. E/3161/2010 in respect of which in terms of para 7, the stay had been granted - it appears that due to typographical mistake, the stay application No. 2939/2010 has been mentioned as stay application No. 2933/2010 and vice-vers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lication No. E/S/2939/2010 had been allowed ; and (b) in respect of application No. E/S/2933/2010, the appellant had been directed to deposit the entire amount of duty within a period of four weeks and report compliance on 2/2/2010. 1.1 The amount involved in appeal No. E/3161/2010 (SM) in respect of which stay application No. E/S/2939/2010 has been filed, is Rs. 2,52,717/- and the amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a demand relating to appeal No. 3158/2010 (linked stay application No. E/S/2933/2010) is time barred. But, it is in respect of stay application No. E/S/2933/2010 that pre-deposit has been ordered. It appears that the pre-deposit of Rs. 2,52,717/- should have been ordered in respect of appeal No. E/3161/2010 (stay application No. E/S/2939/2010) where the full waiver has been granted. In other words ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
