https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257399 Pending appeal, the Tribunal examined whether pre-deposit and stay of recovery were justified on prima facie merits and financial hardship. The dispute concerned alleged removal of aluminium wires without duty on kachha challans, but the applicants argued that the records reflected job-work receipts of raw material and that the alleged production exceeded installed capacity. The Tribunal noted that the matter depended on evidence from both sides, that cross-examined witnesses did not support their earlier statements, and that the retractions of the remaining statements still required scrutiny. It accepted the pleaded hardship and treated the proposed deposit as reasonable, directing a deposit within eight weeks and staying recovery on compliance. en-us Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Feb 2015 16:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257399 Pending appeal, the Tribunal examined whether pre-deposit and stay of recovery were justified on prima facie merits and financial hardship. The dispute concerned alleged removal of aluminium wires without duty on kachha challans, but the applicants argued that the records reflected job-work receipts of raw material and that the alleged production exceeded installed capacity. The Tribunal noted that the matter depended on evidence from both sides, that cross-examined witnesses did not support their earlier statements, and that the retractions of the remaining statements still required scrutiny. It accepted the pleaded hardship and treated the proposed deposit as reasonable, directing a deposit within eight weeks and staying recovery on compliance. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257399