TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 471X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. The present appeal is against the OIO No. 24/01 dated 29-11-2001/13-12-2001 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore Commissionerate I. The issues involved are the following. (1) Whether Modvat credit should be disallowed in respect of items No. 1, 3, 10, 11, 12 17 of Annexure A to the show cause notice as these items on which Modvat credit was taken were removed without reversing the credit? (2) Whether duty is demandable on the Hydraulic Sea Crane alleged to be manufactured and marketed by the appellant? (3) Recovery of Modvat credit of Rs. 2,18,900/- on the inputs used for repair/replacement under proviso to Rule 57-I(1)(i) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. (4) Levy of penalty under Section 11A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Central Excise Challan for job work by following the procedure. Hence there is no question of reversal of Modvat credit on these items. The learned SDR contended that from the documents shown, it is not possible to say whether the duty has been paid or not. The learned Advocate showed certain documents received in the stores wherein duty particulars are shown. Therefore, wherever duty particular are not shown, in the documents of the stores it can be assumed that the same is not duty paid. When no duty is paid on an item no Modvat credit can be taken. When these items are transferred there is no question of reversal. The Revenue has also not quantified properly the duty liability. Under these circumstances, the explanation of the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lectric crane into hydraulic on replacement of certain components parts cannot be said to have resulted in the emergence of a entirely new product. This can be compared to fitting diesel engine to a petrol car. Even before fitting diesel engine, the items remain as a car and afterwards also it is a car. In the same way, we find that the conversion to Hydraulic version cannot be considered as a manufacture and the demand on this count cannot be sustained. Hence we set aside the demand of duty of Rs. 5 lakhs on this count. 7. The adjudicating authority ordered recovery of Modvat credit of Rs. 2,18,900/- on the inputs used for repair/replacement. Advocate contended that there was no drawal of modvated inputs for repair/replacement. The posit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
