2016 (4) TMI 1185

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... R The appellant, M/s. Orient Bell Ltd., is in appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. NOI/EXCUS/002/APP/321/2014-15, dated 14-1-2015 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & Service Tax, Noida. 2. The issue in this appeal is whether the appellants who acquired the squaring and champering machine on 21-1-2004 for Rs. 21,66,692/- and availed Cenvat credit of Rs. 3,46,671/- disposed o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... O dated 15-7-2014 levying duty on the champering machine under Rule 3(5) of Rs. 1,38,668/- along with equal amount of penalty under Rule 15(2) of CCR read with Section 11AC of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order, was pleased to allow the appeal in part but confirmed the demand of duty on the champering mac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and ld. Commissioner erred in disallowing the claim confirming the duty under Rule 3(5) of CCR. It is further argued that the machinery was disposed of on 2-3-2010 and duty paid vide debit entry dated 5-3-2013, Cenvat credit according to the transaction value, was reversed, as there was confusion, if Cenvat credit had been taken earlier. There is no contumacious conduct or concealment on the part .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X