https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85152 CEGAT held that a miscellaneous application could not enlarge the disputed duty amount because the later demands cited by the applicants related to separate proceedings, not the impugned order. It therefore rejected the request to revise the amount in dispute. On the Modvat credit issue, the Tribunal found that the goods prima facie appeared to be apparatus or appliances, such as evaporant holders and boron nitride boats, rather than eligible inputs. As a prima facie case for full relief was not made out, waiver of pre-deposit was declined and only partial pre-deposit was directed. en-us Tue, 31 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Aug 2011 10:31:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85152 CEGAT held that a miscellaneous application could not enlarge the disputed duty amount because the later demands cited by the applicants related to separate proceedings, not the impugned order. It therefore rejected the request to revise the amount in dispute. On the Modvat credit issue, the Tribunal found that the goods prima facie appeared to be apparatus or appliances, such as evaporant holders and boron nitride boats, rather than eligible inputs. As a prima facie case for full relief was not made out, waiver of pre-deposit was declined and only partial pre-deposit was directed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85152