https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204360 Waiver of pre-deposit under section 35F of the Central Excise Act was refused for appellants 1 to 3 because the record prima facie supported the revenue's allegation of Cenvat credit being taken on HR coils without actual use in manufacture, reinforced by section 14 statements and surrounding circumstances. The Tribunal held that they had not established a prima facie case for complete waiver and that section 35F requires consideration of both undue hardship and protection of revenue; they were directed to make a substantial pre-deposit, with partial waiver and stay on compliance. For appellants 4 and 5, who were only cutters and were not alleged to have sold the coils or passed on the credit, pre-deposit of penalty was waived and recovery stayed. en-us Mon, 25 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204360 Waiver of pre-deposit under section 35F of the Central Excise Act was refused for appellants 1 to 3 because the record prima facie supported the revenue's allegation of Cenvat credit being taken on HR coils without actual use in manufacture, reinforced by section 14 statements and surrounding circumstances. The Tribunal held that they had not established a prima facie case for complete waiver and that section 35F requires consideration of both undue hardship and protection of revenue; they were directed to make a substantial pre-deposit, with partial waiver and stay on compliance. For appellants 4 and 5, who were only cutters and were not alleged to have sold the coils or passed on the credit, pre-deposit of penalty was waived and recovery stayed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 25 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204360