2004 (4) TMI 482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Appellant. Shri M.K. Gupta, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Moheb Ali M., Member (T)]. - The stay application arose out of the order of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur. In the impugned order he demanded differential duty of Rs. 4,90,51,770/- (BED + AED) under Section 11A and imposed a penalty of Rs. 30,00,000/-(Thirty lakhs) under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... order held that the applicant has not discharged appropriate duty on captively consumed yarn inasmuch as he has availed of the benefit of Notification No. 22/96 on and so has to pay 16% Adv. BED + 8% AED on the final product, i.e. Denim fabrics. The applicant discharged duty only at the rate of 8% BED and 4% AED on the final product availing the benefit of Notification No. 14/2002. The Commission....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r above cited do not advance the cause of the applicant. He argued that the applicant procures cotton fibre from open market as well as yarn and uses them in the manufacture of Denim. This final product is not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 14/2002 as no appropriate duty was paid on the fibre or yarn used in the manufacture of Denim fabrics. 6. We examined the rival contention....