TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Revenue filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby Modvat benefit was allowed and penalty was reduced. The Respondent filed the cross-objection against confiscation of 250 Kgs. of 100% Viscose Yarn and imposition of redemption fine and penalty. 2. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the Respondents were engaged in the manufacture of doubling of yarn and the same was exempted from duty prior to 1-4-2003. On 13-11-2003, the Central Excise Officers visited the Respondent's factory and found that the Respondent were manufacturing the said goods without obtaining the Central Excise Registration and cleared the goods without payment of duty. They also seized 250 K ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Advocate on behalf of the Respondent submits that 250 Kgs. of Viscose yarn was lying at their factory and, therefore, confiscation is not justified as held by this Tribunal in a series of decisions. He further submits that the Respondent is a small scale unit and levy was imposed on 14-3-2003 and acted in bona fide manner and, therefore, penalty is not sustainable. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, J K (Jammu) v. M/s. Basantar Foundary Fabrications -Final Order No. 351/2006-EX, dated 28-3-2006. He further submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) considered the facts and circumstances of the case and thereafter allowed the Cenvat benefit and reduced the penalty. He relied upon the decision of the Hon' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they are usable to take credit immediately after receipt of the inputs. 6. I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the Cenvat Credit after following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Arvind Agarwal v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi - 2005 (179) E.L.T. 570 (T-D), wherein it has been held that once duty demanded in respect of final products alleged to have been removed clandestinely, assessee is entitled to claim Modvat credit on inputs used in manufacture of goods. In this case, I find that the Respondent during the visit of the Central Excise Officers produced the documents and claimed Cenvat benefit, therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly allowed the benefit of Cenvat credit to the Respondent. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
