TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvat Credit Rules. - Demand set aside - Decided in favor of assessee. - Excise Appeal No. 2336 of 2008 - Final Order No. 52174/2016 - Dated:- 10-6-2016 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri A. Upadhyay, Advocate - for the appellant. Shri Yogesh Agarwal, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. ORDER The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner, Indore dated 21/07/2008. 2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of dutiable goods such as Sulphuric Acid, Detergent Powder etc. and exempted goods like Single Super Phosphate (Fertilizer). A portion of the sulphuric acid is also cleared without payment of duty for special purposes. The app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd, have allowed the appeal giving the benefit to the appellants. 4. Heard Shri A. Upadhyay, learned Advocate for the appellant as well as Shri Yogesh Agarwal, learned DR for the Revenue. The facts are not in dispute. Admittedly Cenvat credit to the tune of ₹ 14,363/- has been availed and utilized by the appellant on common services. A mechanical application of Rule 6 (3) (b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules has lead the Commissioner to a demand of over ₹ 80 lakhs, calculated @ 10% of the value of the exempted products cleared alongwith imposition of a penalty of equivalent amount. But it is easy to see the grossly unjust nature of the demand. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnate Wires (P) Ltd. vs. CCE (supra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dispute to higher and higher appellate fora. Such a feud mentality brings no additional revenue to the exchequer. It only generates bad blood by heaping unmerited misery on the assessees. Further, appellate fora also get clogged with fruitless disputes. High time Government deviced a method to put down this irresponsible tendency on the part of administrative authorities, to file too many unwarranted appeals. 5. In view of what is stated above, the appeal of the? Revenue is rejected as entirely lacking in merit and the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals) is confirmed . 5. This Tribunal has followed this judgment in other so many cases such as in Satyakala Agro Oil Products Ltd. vs. CCE, Guntur reported in 2008 (223) E.L.T. 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
