2003 (11) TMI 532

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Appellant. Shri B.L. Narasimhan, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - The Revenue has preferred this Appeal against the Order-in-original No. 22/02, dated 22-1-2002, by which the Commissioner has confirmed the demand of Central Excise duty against M/s. Advance Steel Tubes Ltd. and imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on them. 2. Shri D.N. Choud....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8) E.L.T. 361 (Tribunal - LB)] that the Commissioner readjudicated the matter under Order-in-Original No. 33/2001, dated 30-5-2001 which was again remanded by the Tribunal vide Final Order No. A/108/2001-NB, dated 5-11-2001 with the direction to consider the Modvat claim and abatement of duty under Section 4(4)(d) (ii) of the Act; that on readjudication the Commissioner under the impugned order ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....B.L. Narsimhan, learned Advocate for the respondents mentioned that the Modvat credit of Rs. 46,168/- said to have been wrongly availed of by them, will be reversed by the respondents and they are not disputing the said disallowance of the Modvat credit. On the question of penalty, he submitted that when the Tribunal has remanded the matter for allowing the Modvat credit and for redetermining the ....