TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 802X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner has not examined the matter afresh and has merely confirmed the earlier order of his predecessor. He states that the appellants had received back defective goods under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, for repair, remaking, etc. on which duty was initially paid. They have maintained records wherever the impugned goods have been remade amounting to manufacture and in respect of such goods the appellants have again paid duty. In respect of the remaining goods only minor repairs have been done and the same have been cleared without payment of duty as permitted under Rule 173H. They have filed necessary intimation under D3 and they were not asked to follow any procedures nor any additional documents were required to be mainta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at machineries taken for remaking are dismantled and good parts are put to further use as defective parts are discarded. The statements as stated above do not show that every item brought under Rule 173H was dismantled. 5. We also find that under Rule 173L where a refund is allowed in respect of defective goods received back, there is a stipulation for keeping such goods in a segregated manner with separate accounts. Such a strict stipulation is not there in respect of Rule 173H. No doubt Rule 173H authorises the Commissioner to subject an assessee to specific conditions in regard to goods received and repaired but there is no reference in the adjudicating Commissioner s order regarding any additional conditions stipulated. 6. Under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcept to the extent the appellants have admitted their duty liability and have paid the same. It is seen from the appeal filed by the appellants that they have admitted and paid Rs. 4,54,646/-. Since this amount has been paid on 23-3-1995 before the provision for payment of interest was introduced in the Central Excise Law, no interest is payable in respect of this amount. The imposition of fine and penalty as also demand of interest made in the impugned order by reference to the earlier order of the predecessor adjudicating Commissioner without any independent finding and without also passing any order of confiscation is set aside. (Operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court on completion of the hearing) - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
