9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the appellant. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, "the Act") against the order of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 21.10.2009, Annexure A-3, proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in terms of Rule 16(3) of the Rules read with Trade Notice No.03-CE/2002 dated 31.01.2002?" 2. The assessee is engaged in manufacture of Pistons & Gudgeon Pins falling under Chapter 84 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) and was availing CENVAT Credit. During audit, it was observed that the assessee cleared excisable goods during January 2006 to Octobe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning etc. were removed by the appellants without payment of duty and as such duty has been proposed to be demanded. The charge for demand of duty is that the appellants have not complied with the procedure laid down in Trade Notice 3/2002 dated 30.1.2002 issued by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Chandigarh. It is alleged that the appellants had not obtained prior permission as required under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ack fromtheir sales depots for reconditioning, reprocessing etc. The department has not produced any evidence to indicate that the processes undertaken by the appellants amounted to manufacture. I have perused copy of letter being C.No.IV/(16)/Tech/182/06/95 dated 8.1.07 and I find that the Commissioner, Central Excise, Chandigarh has granted permission to the appellants under Rule 1693) for the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
