9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Appellants filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The Commissioner of Central Excise in the impugned order denied the benefit of Notification No. 5/99-C.E., dated 28-2-1999, demanded duty and imposed penalty. The penalty of Rs. 17,932/- was also imposed in respect of shortage of finished products. The duty in respect of shortage of finishe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Dist, Gurgaon. The appellants are clearing the goods on payment of full tariff rate and were availing benefit of Modvat credit of the duty paid of the inputs received in this factory. The benefit of the notification was denied to the appellant on the ground that the appellants were availing the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of the inputs in the factory at 51, Roz-Ka-Meo, Industrial Area, S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . v. C.C.E., reported in 2001 (130) E.L.T. 359 (Tribunal) = 2000 (41) RLT 389. 6. The contention of the Revenue is that the condition of the notification is such that if a manufacturer avails the credit of duty in respect of the specified goods, the manufacturer is not entitled for the benefit of notification. As the appellants were availing the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of inputs used ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... put restriction on the manufacturer not to avail the credit of duty on the product in respect of which the exemption is availed or on any other product manufactured in the same factory. The condition No. 10 of the notification does not mention that the manufacturer could not avail the Modvat credit in all the factories under him. The Tribunal in the case of N.M. Nagpal (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Delhi, repo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
