Scope of remand controls fresh adjudication, and overbroad denial of Modvat credit justified unconditional stay.

The remand was limited to verifying the factual position on withdrawal and acceptance of depreciation by the income-tax authorities, but the Commissioner's fresh order went beyond that direction by denying Modvat credit on a broader ground. Because the adjudication exceeded the scope of remand and was inconsistent with the settled legal position, a prima facie case was found in favour of the appellant. The stay petition was therefore allowed unconditionally.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant had made out a prima facie case for unconditional stay, and whether the fresh order by the Commissioner travelled beyond the scope of the remand.

Analysis: The matter had been remanded only to verify the factual position regarding withdrawal and acceptance of depreciation by the income-tax authorities. The fresh adjudication again denied Modvat credit on a wider ground, without confining itself to the remand direction. The order was found to be inconsistent with the settled legal position and beyond the remit of the remand.

Outcome: A prima facie case was held to exist in favour of the appellant, and the stay petition was allowed unconditionally.

---