2010 (2) TMI 463

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Sl. Nos. 167 & 243 of the table attached to the impugned Adjudication Order. (ii) The Credit of Rs. 16,68,159.00 taken in respect of Sl. Nos. 4, 8, 9 & 133 of the table attached to the impugned Adjudication Order. (iii) The Credit of Rs. 4,17,577.00 in respect of Sl. Nos. 36, 52, 117(2) & 159 of the table attached to the impugned Adjudication Order. (iv) The Credit of Rs. 300.00 in respect of Grinding Wheels, vide Sl. No. 202 of the table attached to the Adjudication Order. 3(i). The contention of the Appellant in respect of 2(i) (supra), is that the Credit was taken on the strength of Certificate A issued by the suppliers evidencing payment of differential duty under Rule 57E of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and there is no di....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....apter Heading. The actual classification as per the relevant invoices is 8504.00 and was declared in declaration  dated 1-5-1996, vide Sl. Nos. 495, 503, 504 and 626 of the said declaration. The contention of the Appellant is also that the credit in any case was deniable for non-filing or wrong filing of declaration. There may be procedural mistake. On merits also, the issue has been decided by the decision of Tribunal in the case of SAIL v. CCE, Raipur reported in 2008 (227) E.L.T. 265 (Tri.-Del.). They also placed reliance on the Board's Circular No. 41/7/99-C.X., dated 23-2-1999. 3(iv). The contention of the Appellant in respect of 2(iv) (supra), is that the Item in question is classifiable under Chapter Heading 68.01 and they ar....