TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foot-path etc. and not used as concrete mason building blocks, for which the same is distinguishable from concrete blocks and this forms the basis of the duty demand. A close scrutiny of Notification No. 10/2006-CE, would reveal that all goods covered under Chapter Heading 68 except Heading 6804, 6805, 6811, 6812, 6813 are covered in the said notification for concessional rate of duty @ 8% and not 16% - Therefore, even if it is accepted that appellant had classified the same under Chapter Heading 68101990 and puts the same in others category, still the same is covered under Notification No. 10/2006-CE for reduced rate of duty and comparison of the same with solid and hollow building blocks by the Commissioner (Appeals) in denying such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts case is that appellant-1 is a company engaged in manufacture of paver blocks classifiable under Chapter Heading 6810 of the Central Excise Act. Notification No. 10/2006 referred above permits clearance of products under Chapter Heading 6810 @ 8% Excise duty instead of 16% which appellant intended to avail and accordingly intimated to the Range Superintendent on 01.04.2007. Preventive officer of respondent-department visited the premises of appellant company and objected to such clearance at reduced rate of duty. Appellant-2 and others, subsequent to investigation were issued with show-cause notices dated 09.05.2008 proposing denial of benefit of the Notification No. 10/2006. Upon adjudication, duty demand of ₹ 12,48,698/- was con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had travelled beyond the show-cause notice as such wrong classification by appellant was not shown as a ground for denial of benefits of exemption notification in the show-cause notice as voluntarily acceptance and in view of the fact that appellant had suo-moto informed to the department vide its letter dated 01.04.2007 that it was going to avail the benefit of exemption Notification No. 10/2006-CE, extended period is not invokable to impose equivalent penalty alongwith duty demand, for which the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is required to be set aside. 4. In response to such submissions, learned Authorised Representative for the respondent-department Shri Anil Choudhary, argued in favour of the reasoning and rationality ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and this forms the basis of the duty demand. To it, only solid/hollow building blocks are covered under such Notification No. 10/2006-CE, which also finds approval ultimately in the order of Commissioner (Appeals). However, a close scrutiny of Notification No. 10/2006-CE, would reveal that all goods covered under Chapter Heading 68 except Heading 6804, 6805, 6811, 6812, 6813 are covered in the said notification for concessional rate of duty @ 8% and not 16%. Therefore, even if it is accepted that appellant had classified the same under Chapter Heading 68101990 and puts the same in others category, still the same is covered under Notification No. 10/2006-CE for reduced rate of duty and comparison of the same with solid and hollow building ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
