https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264860 In a stay petition concerning automobile cess, the tribunal held that exemption from excise duty did not automatically extend to cess and that the expression "automobiles" in the relevant schedule and rules was broad enough to include the defence vehicles manufactured by the appellant. The Board circular on hydraulic excavators was treated as inapplicable. As the appellant also failed to establish financial hardship or support a claim for complete waiver, unconditional waiver of pre-deposit was refused. Waiver of the balance and stay of recovery were granted only on deposit of the entire duty demand within the stipulated period. en-us Tue, 10 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 04 Oct 2015 19:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264860 In a stay petition concerning automobile cess, the tribunal held that exemption from excise duty did not automatically extend to cess and that the expression "automobiles" in the relevant schedule and rules was broad enough to include the defence vehicles manufactured by the appellant. The Board circular on hydraulic excavators was treated as inapplicable. As the appellant also failed to establish financial hardship or support a claim for complete waiver, unconditional waiver of pre-deposit was refused. Waiver of the balance and stay of recovery were granted only on deposit of the entire duty demand within the stipulated period. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264860