9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER This is an application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 1,03,86,375/- and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellant/Applicant are an 100% EOU and cleared in DTA the manufactured goods namely, Linear Alkyl Benzene Sulphonic Acid (LABSA) and Spent Sulp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isable goods which are or manufactured or produced by an 100% EOU. Consequently, the differential duty was confirmed and equal amount of penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority. 3. The ld. Consultant appearing for the Applicant/Appellant submitted that the Notification No. 2/2008-C.E., dated 1-3-2008 was issued under Section 5A of Central Excise Act, 1944, reducing the rate of duty from 16% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble to pay duties based on applicable basic Customs duty and applicable additional duty of Customs (CVD) in terms of the exemption Notification. It is his submission that even though the clarification is specific, the ld. Commissioner has declined to accept the same and confirmed the duty and imposed penalty. 4. Per contra, the ld. AR appearing for the Department, submitted that the said clarific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the applicant had calculated and paid CVD component of the total duty availing exemption Notification No. 2/2008-C.E., dated 1-3-2008 and exemption Notification No. 4/2006-C.E., dated 1-3-2006 for clearance of LABSA & Spent Sulphuric Acid in DTA respectively. We find that a clarification was issued vide F.No. DGEP/EOU/03/2007 dated 2-4-2008 by the Addl. Director General (EP) under C.B.E. & C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We find that in the Webel-SL. Energy's (supra) case where we had directed pre-deposit, such a Circular clarifying the issue was not cited before us. Nevertheless, the scope and applicability of the said clarification to the facts of the case and its validity in the backdrop of Ratan Melting's case, would be taken up at the time of deciding the appeal. In these circumstances, we find that the appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
