2006 (3) TMI 395

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n thousand two hundred and eight and paise sixty) has been denied to the appellants on the ground that the irregularity is in respect of non-declaration of the goods as being capital goods. The Department's contention is that the appellants have declared these goods as inputs, which in fact were not inputs. The appellants contention is that these structurals are used in the furnace of their factory. I find that the appellants have, in this case, not declared the goods correctly and it was for them to clearly indicate where these goods are used. They have not clearly indicated in the declaration that these goods are used in their furnace. Further, I find that the learned Commissioner has not clearly spelt out in the Order-in-Original whet....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is of such a clear intimation by the Departmental Officers from Faridabad, to my mind, the denial of MODVAT Credit of Rs. 3,84,918.54 (Rupees three lakh eighty-four thousand nine hundred and eighteen and paise fifty-four) is wrong and un-sustainable. The appellants' appeal to that extent is allowed. (iii)   In respect of disallowance of the credit of Rs. 1,191.50 (Rupees one thousand one hundred and ninety-one and paise fifty), the appellants submit that they have already reversed the amount and are not challenging. Hence demand of this amount is upheld. (iv)   Regarding the disallowance of MODVAT Credit of Rs. 1,76,811.40 (Rupees one lakh seventy-six thousand eight hundred and eleven and paise forty), the appellan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... able to justify only a credit of Rs. 1,01,840.40 (Rupees one lakh one thousand eight hundred and forty and paise forty) out of Rs. 1,76,811.40 (Rupees one lakh seventy-six thousand eight hundred eleven and paise forty), the balance amount of Rs. 74,971.00 (Rupees seventy-four thousand nine hundred and seventy-one only) is disallowed to the appellants and the appeal to that extent is rejected. 2.2. As regards the interest on the amount of duty payable, I fine that the interest has been invoked by the adjudicating authority under the provisions of Rule 57-I(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. I find from the said Rules that the interest under Rule 57-I(5) can be invoked, only if the credit of duty paid on the inputs has been taken ....