9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1026X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Jt. CDR), for the Respondent. ORDER This is an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty demand of Rs. 21,70,786/- along with interest and equal amount of penalty. 2. The appellant is a public sector undertaking engaged in the manufacture and sale of petroleum product falling under chapter 27 of Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the period of August, 2001 to August, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Additional Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 31-10-2006 whereby he confirmed the duty demand raised vide show cause notice along with interest and imposed equal amount of penalty on the appellant. 3. The appellant preferred appeal against the order-in-original. The Commissioner (Appeals) however rejected the appeal. 4. Feeling aggrieved of the impugned order-in-appeal passed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... milar circumstances cannot form part of the value for the purpose of excise duty. It is also contended that aforesaid judgment of the Tribunal was accepted by the Board and in order to set the controversy at rest, the Board issued a clarificatory Circular No. 923/13/2010-CX, dated 19-5-2010 clarifying that the Board has accepted the order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Haldia Petroleum Corpor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies v. C.C.E., Indore - 2004 (167) E.L.T. 241. 6. Shri Devender Singh, ld. Jt. CDR for Revenue on the contrary has opposed the stay application and reiterated the line of reasoning adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals). 7. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the record. Taking into account the submissions made by the ld. counsel for the appellant particularly the judgment of Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
