9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 585X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of central excise duty of Rs.6,34,784/- along with interest and equal penalty on the appellant. 2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the appellant were engaged in the manufacture of non-alloy bars and rods falling under chapter heading 7211.11 and 7214.90 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During scrutiny of RT-12 returns of the appellant, it was observed that they had utilized the Modvat Credit amounting to Rs.1,24,027.67 during the month of August, 1997 for payment of central excise duty on the final products. Since the credit available with the appellant lying on 31.07.1997 had already lapsed as per Notification No. 33/97-CE (NT) dated 01.08.1997, no fresh credit could be allowed to the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant and upheld the Order-in-Original. Hence, the present appeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the material on record. 4.1 Shri Om Prakash, the appellant appeared himself and submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the evidence on record. 4.2 He has further submitted that he has filed the detailed submissions before the Commissioner which may be considered for deciding the present appeal. The appellant has made the following submissions: i) that they were not required to pay duty under Section 3A of the Act during the month of August, 1997 as provisions of compounded levy scheme introduced vide Notification No. 30/97-CE(NT) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ts and directed them to deposit duty under Rule 96 ZP of the Rules; the said order of the Commissioner of Central Excise was challenged by the appellant before the Tribunal at New Delhi who vide Final Order No. 622/05-EX dated 19.07.2005 set aside the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise with consequential relief to the appellant. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court vide order dated 22.01.2007 dismissed the appeal filed by the department against Tribunal's Order. Further, the appeal of the department against the order of the Punjab & Haryana High Court was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 10.09.2007 which has been accepted by the department. v) that since the order of the Commissioner of Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s only lapsed w.e.f. 01.09.1997 when the Notification No. 43/97 dt. 30.08.1997 was made applicable. Therefore, in our view, this Modavt credit has rightly been availed by the appellant. 8. As regard the second issue of short payment of central excise duty of Rs.5,10,756/-, we find that earlier the Commissioner vide his order dated 30.10.2003 finally determined the annual capacity of production of the appellant as recorded in para 3.4.6 that the appellant were paying duty @ Rs.400/- per MT. It clearly shows that they were working under Rule 96 ZP(1) instead of 96 ZP(3) of the Rules. Further, we find that the appellant have been regularly filing the returns showing that they are working under Rule 96 ZP(1) and therefore, are entitled to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
