9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... capital goods, and as there was damage the same could not be used as input. Further, confirmation of duty demand of Rs 1,41,172/- and has arisen on the appellant on the ground that they had availed the benefit of Cenvat/Modvat credit on the finished goods which were cleared from the factory received back under the provisions of Rule 16 of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The adjudicating authority did not accept the contention raised by the appellant and confirmed the demand of the duty in both the issues and imposed penalties and also ordered for recovery of interest. On an appeal ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order-in-original. 3. The ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that as regards the issue of confirmation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -Mumbai) and followed by the Division Bench decision of the Dutta Metal Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [2007 (217) E.L.T. 306(Tri. - Mum.) = 2007-TIOL-284-CESTAT-MUM) and Surindra Engg. Co. Ltd. Commr. of C. Ex Belapur as reported at [2007 (210) E.L.T. 287 (Tri. Mumbai)]. 4. Ld. SDR on the other hand submits that as regards the confirmation of demand of Rs. 1, 41,177/- the issue is squarely covered against the assessee. He submits that the Division Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd. (Vide Final Order Nos. A/398 & 399/2007) [2007 (215) E.L.T. 547 (Tribunal)] has held that once the goods are cleared from the factory on payment of duty, they are marketable and hence credit taken by the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing marketable or non-marketable does not arise as duty is to be discharged all the goods on removal from the factory premises. Once such duty is paid on removal of the goods, the provisions of Central Excise Rules as regard the payment of duty are satisfied and in case, the duty paid goods are to be brought back for remaking, refining, reconditioning or for any other reason, this would be covered by Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It would be relevant to read the said Rule: "Rule 16. Credit of duty on goods brought to the factory. - (1) Where any goods on which duty had been paid at the time of removal thereof are brought to any factory for re-made, refined, re-conditioned or for any other reason, the assessee shall state the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal to that extent is rejected. 5A. As regards the appeal of the appellant against the confirmation of Rs.2, 18,893/- I find from the order-in-original that the confirmation has been done by the adjudicating authority under the provisions of Rules 57-I and 57U of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 which were substituted by Notification No.27/2000-C.E. (N.T.), dated 31-2-2000 wherein the entire Modvat provisions enshrined is Central Excise Rules, 1944 were substituted with the new provision That is to say, on the date of issuance of show cause notice (in this case on18-4-2000) there were no provisions of Central Excise Rules, 1944 existing, in Order to issue show cause notice for recovery of the credit wrongly availed by the appellant. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
