Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (2) TMI 375

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3-1-2017 - Mr Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri. S.A. Gundecha, Advocate for the Appellants Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent (A.R.) for the Respondent Per : Ramesh Nair The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Insulated Wires and Cables classifiable under Chapter Sub-heading No. 8544.90 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They cleared the wires and cables at NIL rate of duty to M/s. Balrampur Chinni Mills Ltd under exemption notification No. 6/2002-CE dated 1-3-2002 on the basis of annexure-I submitted by the buyer of the goods following the provisions of Central Excise (Removal of the Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Goods) Rules, 2001 therefore demand was wrongly made on the appellant. He placed reliance on the following judgments: (a) Bajaj Auto Ltd Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Pune [1987(31) ELT 970(Tri) (b) Collector of C. Ex. Madras Vs. Madras Radiators Pressings Ltd [1994(69) ELT 409(Tri.)] (c) Collector of Central Excise, Guntur Vs. Ferro Alloys Corporation [1994(71) ELT 931(Tribunal)] (d) Collector of Central Excise, Bombay Vs. Electronic Engg. Co [1997(90) ELT 434] (e) Kuil Fireworks Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise [1997(95) ELT 3(SC)] 3. Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Ld. Superintendent (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that admittedly wire .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Commissioner Deputy Commissioner shall ensure that the goods received are used by the manufacturer for the intended purpose and where the subject goods are not used by the manufacturer for the intended purpose, the manufacturer shall be liable to pay the amount equal to the difference between the duty leviable on such goods but for the exemption and that already paid, if any, at the time of removal from the factory of the manufacturer of the subject goods, along with interest and the provisions of section 11A and section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) shall apply mutatis mutandis for effecting such recoveries. Provided that if the subject goods on receipt are found to be defective or damaged or unsuitable or surp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates