9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 510X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation is essentially on seeking review of the analyses and conclusions recorded in the said order, whereby pre-deposit of ₹ 1.5 crores was directed on the appellant. It is axiomatic that an application for review is unavailable for reconsidering the very issues which were subject matter earlier and on which such earlier order was passed. Since the order dated 21.04.2014 recorded elaborate re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Industries Limited. For the period 2007-2008 to 30.11.2011 the impugned adjudication order dated 29.03.2013 passed by the Commissioner, Meerut confirmed excise duty demand of ₹ 14,23,18,197/- apart from penalties and interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The duty demand was confirmed on the basis that the appellant was disentitled to exemption under Notification No. 67 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-deposit was also stipulated to be a condition precedent for stay of all proceedings for recovery of the assessed demand, pending disposal of the appeal. 3. The appellant M/s Shirdi Industries Limited thereafter filed six miscellaneous applications. ST Application No. 53132 of 2014 is for modification of the order dated 21.04.2014; ST application No. 53131 of 2014 is for early hearing of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch earlier order was passed. Since the order dated 21.04.2014 recorded elaborate reasons and analysis for exercise of the discretion and directed pre-deposit of ₹ 1.5 crores, we do not see any justification for review of the said order. 5. On the aforesaid analyses ST application No. 53131, 53132, 53594 of 2014 along with ST application No. 51 205 of 2015 are dismissed. Since the stay wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
