https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46629 Criminal prosecution for alleged false information and related offences under the Central Excise law was maintainable despite a pending CEGAT appeal and a stay on duty recovery. The court distinguished the duty dispute from the criminal allegations, noting that the complaint also alleged fictitious documents, false claims of fly ash consumption, and misdeclaration of materials to evade duty. Because the prosecution was founded on alleged fabrication and misstatement of facts, not merely on non-payment of disputed duty, the stay of recovery did not bar cognizance. The petition to quash or stay the proceedings was rejected, and any objection to the IPC charge could be raised before the trial court. en-us Thu, 21 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:23:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46629 Criminal prosecution for alleged false information and related offences under the Central Excise law was maintainable despite a pending CEGAT appeal and a stay on duty recovery. The court distinguished the duty dispute from the criminal allegations, noting that the complaint also alleged fictitious documents, false claims of fly ash consumption, and misdeclaration of materials to evade duty. Because the prosecution was founded on alleged fabrication and misstatement of facts, not merely on non-payment of disputed duty, the stay of recovery did not bar cognizance. The petition to quash or stay the proceedings was rejected, and any objection to the IPC charge could be raised before the trial court. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46629