TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant. Shri Ajay Saxena, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Moheb Ali M., Member (T)]. - The appellant is a manufacturer of Steel Billets and rolled products of steel, falling under Chapter Heading 7207.90 and 7228.20 of the Schedule to CETA respectively. In the impugned order the Commissioner confirmed a demand of Rs. 27,82,198/- being the credit taken in contravention of Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the factory under delivery challans and not under an invoice prescribed under Rule 52A. It appears that one M/s. Essar Steel, Surat, imported a consignment of 4426.796 MT of shredded scrap and cleared the same under three bills of entry. Out of this quantity 3314.159 MT of shredded scrap seemed to have been supplied to the appellant on which the importer (M/s. Essar Steel) had not availed of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter written by a Superintendent and delivery challans, which are not prescribed documents for the purpose of taking credit. The Tribunal has been consistently holding that Modvat credit cannot be taken on documents other than the ones prescribed in Rule 57G of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal in the case of Balmer Lawrie Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur [2000 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty in the order of the Commissioner who denied the credit taken on inadmissible documents. 4. The Commissioner also imposed a penalty of Rs. 7 lakhs while denying the credit. In our view the penalty is excessive viewed in the light of the fact that the appellant had taken credit of duty paid inputs even though such duty was paid by someone else. In view of this we reduce the penalty to Rs. 2 lak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty even before the issue of show cause notice a penalty under the various rules is not called for. We therefore set aside the penalty of Rs. 1 lakh imposed on this count. 6. The appeal is thus partly allowed. The demand for Modvat credit wrongly taken is upheld. Penalty of Rs. 7 lakhs is reduced to Rs. 2 lakhs. Penalty of Rs. 1 lakh imposed on the ground that the appellants under-valued the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
