1997 (12) TMI 360

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Appellant. Smt. Reshma Lakhani, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - Applications are by common applicant for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 22.40 lakhs and penalty of Rs. 13.50 lakhs. 2. Advocate for the applicant says that the major amount i.e. Rs.15 lakhs of credit is on capital goods such as dumper, earth removing, shifting and handli....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....immovable property. He contends that there is no such requirement in Rule 57Q. A sum of Rs. 0.90 lakhs has been denied on the credit that the Bill of Entry for goods imported was in the name of the applicant's registered office at Mumbai and in the name of the factory. He contends this issue has again decided in applicant's own case. 4. A sum of Rs. 3.40 lakhs has been denied on the ground....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....She also adopts this reasoning in the other aspects also. 6. Refractories specified to be capital goods in Rule 57Q at the relevant time. The contention regarding the Bill of Entry being in the name of the factory also is prima facie not tenable nor the claim that the building in which the civil structure is based is not excisable goods. Prima facie however, we do not find a strong case fo....