https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219694 Transfer of the balance amount in PLA on de-bonding of a 100% EOU unit was treated as a technical irregularity rather than a substantive violation, because the amount could otherwise have been claimed as cash refund and then redeposited in the other account, with no time limit for seeking such refund. On that basis, the interim view was that confirmation of demand or penalty was not justified at the pre-deposit stage. Waiver of pre-deposit was therefore granted and recovery of the dues was stayed until disposal of the appeal. en-us Mon, 18 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219694 Transfer of the balance amount in PLA on de-bonding of a 100% EOU unit was treated as a technical irregularity rather than a substantive violation, because the amount could otherwise have been claimed as cash refund and then redeposited in the other account, with no time limit for seeking such refund. On that basis, the interim view was that confirmation of demand or penalty was not justified at the pre-deposit stage. Waiver of pre-deposit was therefore granted and recovery of the dues was stayed until disposal of the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 18 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219694