Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Belgaum

2016 (8) TMI 437 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Imposition of penalty - Rule 173(Q) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Held that:- imposition of penalty on the assessee is not correct and is against the Final Order dated 20.7.2005 passed by this Tribunal. Therefore, the penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/- imposed under Rule 173(Q) deserves to be set aside. - Reworking/re-quantification of duty - Period of limitation - re-examining the aspect pertaining to availment of Modvat credit - Held that:- the Commissioner in the impugned order has held .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Wadhwa, Judicial Member and Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member Shri M.S. Nagaraj, Advocate - For the Appellant Shri Pakshi Rajan, A.R. - For the Respondent ORDER M/s Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd., Bevinahalli Village, Koppal Dist., filed appeal against the Order dated 12.6.2007 (issued on 13.6.2007) of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Belgaum. Against the same order of the Commissioner, the Revenue has also filed appeal. Both these appeals are being decided by this common o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

191/2005 dated 20.7.2005 interalia holding that the demands could be re-worked out after considering the prayer of time-bar . By the order dated 20.7.2005, the CESTAT set aside the penalty and interest and allowed the appeal by way of remand for re-working out the duty in terms of the direction given n this order for re-examining the aspect pertaining to availment of Modvat credit . 1.2. Consequently, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum passed the impugned order dated 12.6.2007 (issued o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssistant commissioner of Central Excise, Bellary and request for appropriation of the duty so calculated out of the advance deposit of ₹ 45 lakhs until the entire amount of ₹ 45 lakhs is exhausted. Thereafter, they are directed to include the amortised cost of the pattern in the value of the castings and discharge the duty liability as per provisions of Law. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Bellary is also directed to verify the correctness of the differential duty fu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

volved in the case would have been much less, I take a lenient view in the matter and impose a penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/- only ( Rupees one lakh only) under Rule 173 (Q) of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. 4. I hold that the Modvat Credit of ₹ 1,96,083.00 taken in respect of the pattern received from M/s Techser Tools Pvt. Ltd., is admissible under the Rule 57(Q) of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. The Revenue has also filed appeal against the Commissioner s above impugned .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

riod mentioned in the show-cause notice is upto 31.3.1997. The demand should be restricted to the period mentioned in the show-cause notice. The order travels beyond 31.3.1997 and, therefore, the impugned order is required to be set aside as it is not legal, proper and correct. The Respondent, Commissioner imposed penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/- under Rule 173(Q) in violation of direction issued by the Hon ble Tribunal. The Tribunal vide its Final Order No. 1191/2005 had accepted that there was no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dated 20.7.2005, the commissioner s order dated 12.6.2007 has failed to re-work out the duty demand after reconsidering the prayer of time-bar though the issued direction to the assessee, M/s Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd. to furnish invoice-wise amotization amount of pattern charges and differential duty thereon to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Bellary, who was to appropriate the duty so calculated out of the advance deposit of ₹ 45 lakhs. The Commissioner vide his orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version