2018 (2) TMI 390

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... p; -for Appellant(s) Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi (Asstt. Commr.)AR - for Respondent(s) Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar Above stated two appeals are arising out of common Order-in-Appeal No. 02-03-CE/MRT-II/2011 dated 19.01.2011 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Customs and Central Excise, Meerut II. Therefore, these are taken together for decision. Appeal No. E/988/2011 is filed by M/s Raghu Prime Met .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Commissioner (Appeals) which was decided through impugned Order-in-Appeal. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the confirmation of demand and reduced the penalty to Rs. 2 lakhs. Aggrieved by upholding the confirmation of the demand manufacturer appellant preferred present appeal and aggrieved by reduction in penalty, Revenue preferred present appeal. 3. Heard the learned counsel for manufactuer .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... iligence in its dealing with the first stage dealer within the meaning of Rule 9(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the responsibility of assessee is discharged. 4. Heard the learned AR who has submitted that the penalty imposed under Section 11 AC cannot be reduced by Appellate Authority. 5. Having considered the rival contention, I find that there is no allegation that the scrap was non-duty pai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X