9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. Smt. R. Bhagya Devi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - All the appeals, barring one, were filed by the assessee. The remaining appeal is by the department. In one of the appeals filed by the assessee, their name is Vikrant Tyres Ltd. and, in the rest of their appeals, their name figures as J.K. Industries. One of applications, moved today on behalf of the assessee, is for recall of our order dated 8-6-2007, which reads thus: "Adjourned to 25-6-2007 as requested by Advocate on condition that any CENVAT credit taken on the strength of Order-in-Appeal No. 199/2005 is reversed and Range Officer's certificate is produced". The remaining applications are for change of the appellant's name from Vikrant Tyre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ropose to act upon this document coupled with learned Counsel's fervent request. Accordingly, these applications for change of name of the company are allowed. Consequently, in the cause-title of the assessees' appeals, their name shall be changed to 'J.K. Tyre & Industries Ltd'. 2. The remaining application was filed by the assessee qua respondent in the department's appeal No. E/582/2006. It is in this application that the assessee prays for recall of our order dated 8-6-2007, already reproduced. In support of this application, learned Counsel submits that the Revenue's application for stay of operation of Order-in-Appeal No.,199/2005, dated 27-9-2005 was rejected by this Bench as per Stay Order No.1182-1186/2006, dated 6-12-2006, with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, the prayer is to recall our direction dated 8-6-2007 to the applicant to reverse the CENVAT credit of Rs. 2.04 crores taken in their account during the pendency of these appeals. From a scrutiny of the record of our proceedings, it appears that hearing in these appeals has stood adjourned from time to time at the instance of the applicant. In our stay order dated 6-12-2006, we declined stay of operation of Order-in-Appeal No. 199/2005 and dismissed the Revenue's stay application, and also granted waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the amount ordered to be appropriated. As rightly pointed out by learned SDR, the assessee withheld a crucial fact while obtaining the relief of waiver and stay on 6-12-2006. This fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
