Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2013 (6) TMI 215

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arks 1. Shiva Texfabs Ltd. Vill. Bhattian E/S/1878/2012 EX/E/1464/2012 EX DB 50-54/CE/Chd-II/12 4/2009 to 3/2011 18,91,92,076/- 18,91,92,076/- - 2. Shiva Texfabs Ltd. Vill. Bhattian E/Stay/56070/2013 E/55792/2013 EX DB 03-04/CE/Chd-II/13 4/2011 to 3/2012 18,94,98,424/- --     2. After hearing both the sides on the stay petitions, we find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Polyester Filament Tow/Polyester Staple Fibre from Waste PET Bottles i.e. Polyethylene Terepathalate Bottle by undertaking following process:-    " The waste PET Bottles i.e. raw material are subjected to washing followed by removal of labels/non PET material, crushing, conversion into flakes, drying/removal of moistu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ragraph 10 of the Circular stating that decision of the Tribunal in GPL Polyfils Ltd. cannot act as a binding precedent in other matters, cannot be sustained. The Hon'ble High Court further observed that actual process involved and the chemical reaction involved, etc. which are technical and factual aspects and are debatable question would be gone into and examined by the authorities under the Act. However, Hon'ble High Court in para 16 observed as follows:-    "16. However, one difficulty remains as pointed out by the counsel for the petitioners. It is stated that the hands of the authorities are bound and tied because of the impugned circular. It is submitted that the entire adjudication process would be a formality. It is furt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....003 titled M/s. Gammon India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [2011 (269) E.L.T. 289 (S.C.)]. of course the stay of demand will be subject to the order of the CESTAT. The petitioners if denied stay by the CESTAT and aggrieved will be entitled to challenge the order of the CESTAT in accordance with law." 5. As is seen from the above reproduced para, the Hon'ble High Court has observed that equities have to be balanced and in the light of two contra-decisions one by the Board and the other by CESTAT, the Tribunal's decision has to be given due regard if the petitioners are able to show that the same applies. The High Court further observed that the stay of demand will be subjected that if the petitioner is denied stay by the CESTAT an....