2010 (3) TMI 401

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ShriI. Baig, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 83 & 84 CE/Appeal/BPL/07-08 dated 21-8-2007. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellant is a manufacturer of excisable goods such as transformer tanks, high pressure valves, pipe fittings. They have two units separated by a distance of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nalty. Original Authority confiscated the six fabricated columns valued at Rs. 1,05,906/- but allowed the same to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 5,000/-. He confirmed demand of Rs. 80,730/- on 18 columns. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,000/- under Rule 25 and Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Against the said order, both the Department and the party filed appeals before the Com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tsoever in removing six fabricated columns for setting up the Unit-II. If there was any violation, it was technical in nature and question of imposition of penalty under Section 11AC did not arise. 4. Ld. SDR submits that columns fabricated in Unit-I should have been removed only on payment of duty and since they are getting erected in Unit-II, they were not be eligible for Cenvat credit also. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be equal to the Central Excise duty evaded. I, therefore, hold that the assessee is liable to pay a penalty of Rs. 80,730/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty only) under Section 11AC ibid." 5. I have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides. Undisputedly, the appellant are having two different units. The columns fabricated using inputs on which Cenvat credit has been....