https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43082 A challenge to refusal of waiver of pre-deposit and stay required proper consideration of the statutory meaning of "factory" under central excise law. The dispute concerned whether the refinery, xylene unit and polyester staple fibre unit formed one factory for the exemption notification covering Chapter 27 goods used within the same factory. Because the order did not address the statutory definition or the cited authorities and proceeded on an assumption that the units were separate premises, it was set aside. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration with reasons, including the plea of financial hardship, and interim protection against recovery was continued until disposal of the waiver application. en-us Tue, 11 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jun 2010 10:25:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43082 A challenge to refusal of waiver of pre-deposit and stay required proper consideration of the statutory meaning of "factory" under central excise law. The dispute concerned whether the refinery, xylene unit and polyester staple fibre unit formed one factory for the exemption notification covering Chapter 27 goods used within the same factory. Because the order did not address the statutory definition or the cited authorities and proceeded on an assumption that the units were separate premises, it was set aside. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration with reasons, including the plea of financial hardship, and interim protection against recovery was continued until disposal of the waiver application. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43082