2010 (2) TMI 1036

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....espondent. ORDER These two appeals are by the Department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) Nos. 173-174/CE/Appeal/Jal/2007 dated, 28-6-2007. 2. None appears for the respondent in spite of notice. On earlier occasions also, none was present on behalf of the respondents. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that M/s. Prince Agro & Allied Industries, Mandi Gobindgarh is a ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e not eligible for Deemed credit in terms of Notification No. 58/97-C.E. Accordingly, Original Authority confirmed a demand of Rs. 57,122/- along with interest against M/s. Vishal Conduit Industries and imposed equal amount of penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on M/s. Prince Agro & Allied Industries, the supplying unit. On appeal by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er Rule 96ZP(3)". 4.1 He also fairly concedes that the supplying unit and the recipient unit are under the jurisdiction of two different Commissionerates. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. When a unit is working under Compounded Levy Scheme, the question of discharging duty liability based on clearances made invoice-wise does not arise. The unit is required to p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the units sending the inputs. If there was any differential duty due from M/s. Prince Agro & Allied Industries, it would be appropriate for the officer in charge of the said unit to initiate proceedings and recover the same subject to appellate remedies available to the party and the Department at that end. Even at this stage, the Department is not in a position to tell about the nature of dispute....