9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (12) TMI 353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. - Heard both sides. The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby demand in respect of waste and scrap of capital goods is confirmed and credit of Rs. 55,840/- was denied in respect of DG set on the ground that the same is not used in the factory for production of goods and penalty was imposed. 2. The contention of appellant is that the scrap of capital goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed from the factory. In the show cause notice, the specific allegation that appellant sold MS scrap, chain, casting and therefore, it cannot be said that appellant cleared old and used capital goods. The appellant relied upon the decision of Precot Mills Ltd. v. CCE, Tirupathi reported in 2007 (208) E.L.T. 510 whereby duty in respect of waste, scrap of old and used capital goods was set aside. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quiry. There is no evidence to this fact. 6. I find that there as allegation in the show cause notice that the DG set was used for supply of electricity in the residential area. The appellants failed to rebut this fact by way of producing evidence that DG set is used for production of goods in the factory. In absence of such evidence, I find no infirmity in the impugned order whereby credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
