TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... factory in terms of Rule 57CC(1). I therefore confirm the demand of Rs. 2,95,860/- being 8% of the value of IMFL cleared from November, 1998 to December, 1998. As the party did not reverse/pay the said amount which they were required to reverse/pay at the time of clearance of IMFL and continued to wilfully contravene the provisions of Rule 57CC read with Rule 57A, I also impose a penalty of Rs. 2,95,860/- upon the party. The party are directed to pay the adjudged dues within ten days of receipt of this order failing which in addition to the adjudged dues interest shall also be charged at prevailing rate in terms of provision of Rule 57-I(3) read with Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944." The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... either stored separately for different purposes nor is rectified spirit stored separately according to its final use. The respondents are debiting 8% of the sale value of extra neutral alcohol which is chargeable to nil rate of duty while removing it from the factory but they do not do so in the case of IMFL while removing it from the factory and thus the allegation was that they have contravened the provisions of Rule 57CC of the Central Excise Rules. It was, therefore alleged that the respondents cleared IMFL valued at Rs. 36,98,259/- during November, 1998 to December, 1998, therefore they were required to pay the amount equal to 8% of price which comes to Rs. 2,95,860/- under the provisions of Rule 57CC. It was, therefore alleged that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appears to be legislative intention which is also made clear by the caption Rule 57C which says that "credit of duty not to be allowed if final product are exempt"; that as such demanding 8% of the price of IMFL which is non-excisable commodity is very much in order. Ld. SDR further submits that in the Order-in-Original, the Commissioner says that it will be more appropriate to charge an amount at a rate of 8% of the price of rectified spirit; that however he does not give any basis for arriving at such conclusion. Ld. SDR read copiously from the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) and prays that in view of the above submissions, the appeals may be allowed. 5. Shri Kapil Vaish, Chartered Accountant submits that the process of manufactur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the final product should find a place in the Excise Tariff and if the final product was non-excisable. Rule 57CC(1) had no application. He submits that the Central Board of Excise and Customs in their Circular No. 345/61/97-CX dated 23-10-1997 clarified that since the materials recovered during the course of ship-breaking were non-excisable goods. Rule 57CC would not come into play, and that the manufacturer was entitled to full credit of the CVD paid by him. He submits that therefore the other ground of appeal is that the phrase "Exempt from the whole of duty of excise" appearing in Rule 57CC covered the goods which were non-excisable. He submits that this is contrary to the clarification given by the Board in their circular dated 23-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
