9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appeal and stay petition are directed against order-in-appeal No. SK/236-239/RGD/2013-14 dated 28/08/2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. 2. Vide the impugned order, the excise duty demand of Rs. 24,31,969/- has been confirmed against the appellant, M/s. Durall Systems Pvt. Ltd. for the period 2010-2011 by denying the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No.08/2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the portion of the structures consisting of glass. The appellant does not undertake any manufacturing activity in respect of glass facades supplied by them and the manufacturing activity is limited to manufacture of aluminium structures. Therefore, it is only on the aluminium structure fabricated in the factory. If at all, any excise duty liability would be attracted. He also argues that the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he previous period, wherein a pre-deposit of approximately 40% of the duty demanded for the normal period was considered. In the present case the duty demand for the normal period works out to Rs. 7.00 lakhs. Considering that the appellant might be eligible for the Cenvat credit on the inputs, pre-deposit of Rs. 3.00 lakhs would be appropriate. The appellant has already paid a sum of Rs. 2.5 lakhs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
