2012 (5) TMI 430

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... i S.K.Gaule   The Applicant filed this Application for waiver of predeposit of duty amounting to Rs.9,24,656.24.   2. After hearing both sides, we find that the Appeal itself can be disposed of, at this stage. In these circumstances, after waiving the requirement of predeposit, we take up the Appeal for disposal.   3. The contention of the Appellant is that while deciding the cas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of JK Synthetics vs. CCE, Jaipur reported in 1996(88) ELT 785 and in the case of CCE, Indore vs. Surya Roshni Ltd. reported in 2011(128) ELT 293(Tri.-LB). The contention of the Appellant is that definition of Capital Goods was very wide and prior to 23.07.96, the CENVAT Credit on wires and cables was allowable in terms of Notification No.14/96-CE(BT) dated 23.07.1996.   4. The contention of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... MIL India Ltd. vs. CCE, Noida reported in 2007(210) ELT 188(SC). In these circumstances, we direct the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the case afresh, while taking into consideration the case laws cited by the Appellant without insisting for predeposit. Needless to say that a reasonable opportunity of hearing may be granted to the Appellant. The Appeal is allowed by way of remand. Stay P .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X