https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123073 The appellant challenged the disallowance of Cenvat credit and penalty imposition, arguing for waiver of pre-deposit based on a Division Bench reference. The differing views in referral orders do not automatically warrant a waiver of pre-deposit. Regarding the interpretation of the place of removal for goods sold at the port, the appellant argued that the property transfer at the port establishes a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit. An interim stay was granted against the recovery of Cenvat credit and penalty during the appeal's pendency, with the appeal scheduled for final hearing. en-us Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123073 The appellant challenged the disallowance of Cenvat credit and penalty imposition, arguing for waiver of pre-deposit based on a Division Bench reference. The differing views in referral orders do not automatically warrant a waiver of pre-deposit. Regarding the interpretation of the place of removal for goods sold at the port, the appellant argued that the property transfer at the port establishes a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit. An interim stay was granted against the recovery of Cenvat credit and penalty during the appeal's pendency, with the appeal scheduled for final hearing. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123073