TMI Blog2001 (11) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst the order of the Custom, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the CEGAT') dated October 17, 2000 vide which the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed. 2.Briefly, the facts are that the respondent-M/s. Swaraj Automotives Ltd., Nabha, is engaged in the manufacture of PU Foam falling under Chapter sub-heading No. 3926.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The foam so ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2,13,424.17. A penalty of Rs. 25,000/- was also imposed. The respondent filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise Customs, Chandigarh, who vide order dated January 20, 2000 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the adjudicating authority. It was held that "there does exist technical necessity for keeping the protruding f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the waste arises in the manufacture of seats and not in the manufacture of PU Foam articles in view of the evidence cited by the petitioner ? (ii) Whether the learned Tribunal was correct in holding that there is no revenue implication in the procedure followed by respondent No. 1 when the waste is not an input, in terms of Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for use in the manuf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt had paid duty on the actual weight, i.e., by excluding the weight of waste and scrap, then the duty also would have been less. In the present case, the respondent had paid duty on the actual weight of the PU Foam articles and, therefore, it was entitled to claim Modvat credit. In any case, the Revenue has not suffered any loss because the Modvat credit has been taken only of the duty paid by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
