Tribunal upholds duty demand on steel scrap, reduces penalty. Appellants' plea dismissed.

The tribunal upheld the duty demand of Rs. 13,826.20 on steel scrap cleared without payment of duty by the appellants, reducing the penalty from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 1,000. The appellants' plea regarding pre-Modvat scheme stock and duty-free clearance under specific notifications was dismissed due to lack of evidence and failure to meet conditions. The appeal was ultimately dismissed based on insufficient substantiation of the appellants' arguments, particularly concerning pre-Modvat scheme stock.

---

---

Issues: Duty demand on steel scrap, Modvat credit facility, imposition of penalty, exemption notifications.

The case involved a duty demand of Rs. 13,826.20 on steel scrap cleared by the appellants without payment of duty, along with a penalty of Rs. 5,000 imposed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise. The appellants, manufacturers of machine tool accessories, opted for the Modvat credit facility to avail credit of duty paid on inputs starting from March 1, 1986. The waste generated during the manufacturing process from inputs on which credit was taken had to be removed on payment of duty unless exempted by an exemption notification. The appellants cleared a quantity of steel scrap during the specified period, leading to a show cause notice for duty recovery and penalty imposition.

The Adjudicating Authority rejected the appellants' plea, confirming the duty demand and penalty. The appellants contended that the scrap included pre-Modvat scheme stock, but this was dismissed due to lack of documentary evidence. The argument about the quantity of steel bars received was also rejected as the appellants failed to provide records. The contention regarding duty-free clearance under certain notifications was refuted as the conditions were not met. Ultimately, the tribunal upheld the duty demand and reduced the penalty from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 1,000 considering the duty amount involved. The appeal was dismissed based on the lack of substantiation of the appellants' contentions, particularly regarding pre-Modvat scheme stock.

---