https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239987 The Tribunal rejected repeated adjournment requests, emphasizing that adjournments are at the court's discretion. The appellant failed to quantify common input usage, leading to a halt in proceedings. Abuse of CENVAT credit was noted, and the appellant was directed to deposit Rs.40,00,000 within four weeks to comply with court directives. Compliance with apex court rulings on tax credits and manufacturing processes was stressed, with the appellant instructed to make a significant deposit to prevent further abuse of CENVAT credit. en-us Mon, 03 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 24 Nov 2013 08:26:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239987 The Tribunal rejected repeated adjournment requests, emphasizing that adjournments are at the court's discretion. The appellant failed to quantify common input usage, leading to a halt in proceedings. Abuse of CENVAT credit was noted, and the appellant was directed to deposit Rs.40,00,000 within four weeks to comply with court directives. Compliance with apex court rulings on tax credits and manufacturing processes was stressed, with the appellant instructed to make a significant deposit to prevent further abuse of CENVAT credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 03 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239987