https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100144 A claim for waiver of pre-deposit based on Rule 57D(1) failed because the applicant did not produce evidence that the insoluble salt separated from crude glycerine was in fact waste, refuse or a by-product, or that it was not used in the manufacture of any other product. In the absence of such proof, the benefit of the rule could not be invoked to dispense with deposit of the duty demand. Pre-deposit of the duty was therefore directed, while pre-deposit of the penalty was waived and recovery of the penalty stayed. en-us Wed, 13 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:17:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100144 A claim for waiver of pre-deposit based on Rule 57D(1) failed because the applicant did not produce evidence that the insoluble salt separated from crude glycerine was in fact waste, refuse or a by-product, or that it was not used in the manufacture of any other product. In the absence of such proof, the benefit of the rule could not be invoked to dispense with deposit of the duty demand. Pre-deposit of the duty was therefore directed, while pre-deposit of the penalty was waived and recovery of the penalty stayed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 13 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100144