9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .K. Ghosh, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand of Excise Duty of Rs.99,48,397/- along with interest has been confirmed against the appellant and penalty has also been imposed on the appellant. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of goods, namely, Tipper Body, Bus B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Chapter Heading 8707 instead of Chapter Heading 8704. Therefore, it was proposed that the appellant is not entitled for the benefit of Notification No.6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 Sl.No.87 as amended by another Notification No.12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012 Sl.No.334. 2.2 In these set of facts, various show-cause notices were issued to the appellant by invoking extended period of limitation. 2.3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of body building on duty paid Chassis is covered by the decisions of this Tribunal in the cases of Disha Engineers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad I reported in (2023) 4 Centax 305 (Tri.-Ahmd) and AMCL Machinery Limited vide Final Order No.88416/2018 dated 30.11.2018. 4. On the other hand, the ld.A.R. for the Revenue relied on the Chapter Heading and stated that the goods cleared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stead of 8704. In that circumstances, the cases relied upon by the ld.Counsel for the appellant, are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. But we do agree with the ld.Counsel for the appellant that as they were filing ER-1 Returns regularly and classified their product under Chapter Heading 8707 claiming exemption Notification No.6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 Sl.No.87 as amended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
