TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed on appellant - Held that department contention is not correct - Appeal No. E/ESM-435/2006 - Final Order No. A/828/KOL/2007 - Dated:- 9-5-2007 - [Order per] - Heard both sides. The appellants received the impugned capital goods on payment of duty and took credit of the same. Subsequently, they supplied the same to M/s. Continental Technologies (P) Ltd. which is an Export Oriented Un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y by the appellants and after taking credit, they have supplied the same to 100% E.O.U. against CT-3 Certificate which was issued by the jurisdictional Central Excise Officer under Notification No. 22/03-CE. The ld. Advocate explained that the capital goods obtained by them was not useful for the purposes it was brought and it would have remained idle in their factory. By disposing of the same to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said Rule 3(4) is to recover the amount equal to the credit availed by a manufacturer, when he removes the capital goods from his factory. Rule 3(5) also makes it clear that the amount paid under sub-rule (4) of Rule 3, is available as Cenvat credit as if it was a duty paid. Both sub-rules read together make it obvious that if the appellants reversed the credit, the 100% E.O.U. would have been el ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal goods have been supplied, it is not necessary for the appellants to reverse the credit, consequently, the demand confirmed against the appellants is set aside. In the circumstances of the case, there is also no necessity for imposition of any penalty and penalty imposed is also waived. 6. Appeal is allowed in the above terms. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court) - - TaxTMI - TM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
