https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119473 In a Modvat credit dispute, the text examines whether objection to the adjudicating authority's pecuniary jurisdiction could justify interim stay and waiver of pre-deposit. It notes that the monetary-limit circulars were read with the rule on recovery of wrongly availed credit, and that the jurisdictional Central Excise Officer was competent to issue notice and decide the disputed credit. The jurisdiction objection was treated as prima facie untenable because the adjudicating officer was higher in rank than the authority mentioned in the earlier circular. On merits, the appellant relied on gate passes and later document-defect guidance, while the demand relating to polythene film remained partly unsupported on record. Interim stay was granted subject to deposit of Rs. 1,50,000. en-us Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:56:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119473 In a Modvat credit dispute, the text examines whether objection to the adjudicating authority's pecuniary jurisdiction could justify interim stay and waiver of pre-deposit. It notes that the monetary-limit circulars were read with the rule on recovery of wrongly availed credit, and that the jurisdictional Central Excise Officer was competent to issue notice and decide the disputed credit. The jurisdiction objection was treated as prima facie untenable because the adjudicating officer was higher in rank than the authority mentioned in the earlier circular. On merits, the appellant relied on gate passes and later document-defect guidance, while the demand relating to polythene film remained partly unsupported on record. Interim stay was granted subject to deposit of Rs. 1,50,000. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119473