Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2006 (3) TMI 458

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng of M.S. Pipes. The Commissioner by holding that such coating amounts to manufacture resulting in a new commercial commodity, has confirmed demand of duty of Rs. 83,40,81,309/- (Rupees eighty-three crores forty lakhs eighty-one thousand three hundred and nine only) and Rs. 63,35,840/- (Rupees sixty-three lakhs thirty-five thousand eight hundred forty only) against M/s. PSL Ltd., along with imposition of personal penalty of Rs. 72,98,74,433/- and Rs. 20,00,000/- under Section 11AC and Rs. 5 lakhs under Rule 25. In addition, personal penalty of Rs. 1 lakh has been imposed on Shri V.M. Joshi, Asstt. Vice President of the Company. 3. It is seen that the appellant is one of the factories of PSL group, situated at Visakhapatnam and is e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bsp;  Spraying of epoxy powder 4. After issuance of show cause notice and completing the adjudication proceedings, the Commissioner has held that the activity undertaken by the appellants results in emergence of a new and distinct excisable product classifiable under heading 73.04 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The said order of the Commissioner is impugned before us. 5. We have heard Shri V. Sridharan, ld. Advocate for the appellants and Shri Chandra Sekhar, ld. Advocate for the revenue. 6. The appellants have placed strong reliance upon the Tribunal's decision in the case of Tega India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta-II, reported in 2004 (164) E.L.T. 390 (S.C.) as also....