9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1086X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation application, the Tribunal should find out whether any change of circumstance after the previous order is shown with sufficient material in that behalf or any other reason prima facie exists warranting modification of previous order on the ground which was not available when the previous order was made. The mistake in stay order is not apparent on the face of record and it would be established by long drawn process of reasoning, which is not permissible under the law - there is no need to look into stay order of other Bench – there was no substance in the application for modification of stay order - the application for modification stay order filed by the applicant is not sustainable – Decided against Assessee. - E/249-252/2012 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osit on this issue. He drew the attention of the Bench to the representation made by M/s. Solvent Extractors Association to the Chairman, CBEC for granting general exemption under Section 11C of the Act. He also submits that Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal had already pronounced the final order on this issue allowing the appeal of the assessee. He submits that certified copy of the order has not yet been issued. He also submits that the present stay order proceeded on the basis of apex court s decision in the case of CCE Vizag Vs Jocil Ltd. 2011 (263) ELT 9 (SC) which is not directly involved in this case. It is also submitted that the Tribunal in the present stay order also proceeded on the basis of decision of Tribunal in Jhunjhunwala Vanasp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chapter 38 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. We also take note of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of A.G. Flats Ltd. (supra), and Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. (supra). We also take note of the fact that in the decisions relied upon by appellants, there is no specific finding in respect of Palm Fatty Acid which is main disputed item giving rise to most part of the amount confirmed. The demand confirmed in respect of spent earth which prima facie appears to be a waste product is a few thousands only. The earlier stay order was given without considering the decision of the Apex Court as discussed above and also without examining the case of palm fatty as acid as distinct from product like spent earth. 10. Having regard to the facts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was made. 6. On perusal of the present stay order, it is seen that the Tribunal observed that the earlier stay order was given without considering the decision of the Apex Court as discussed above and also without examining the case of palm fatty as acid as distinct from product like spent earth. So, it is clearly evident that the present stay order was passed after considering the decision of Apex Court. The submission of the learned advocate is that the said decision would not cover the instant issue. On the other hand, the learned AR contended that the present issue is covered by the said case which would show that the mistake in stay order, if any, is not apparent on the face of record and it would be established by long drawn proces ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
