TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 161
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts that arise for consideration in the case of Appeal No. E/3108/2002 relates to M/s. Maxworth Plywood Pvt. Ltd. is as under. 2.1 The appellants are manufacturers of plywood for which they import timber logs. Pursuant to the investigation conducted by the department, show cause notice was issued to the appellant proposing to demand the duty on the ground that the appellant had used unaccounted logs for manufacture of plywood. Demand of duty was to the tune of Rs.21,66,561/-. Appellant resisted the show cause notice by challenging the demands on various grounds. The Adjudicating Authority after considering the submissions made by the appellant came to the conclusion that the appellants have violated the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by both sides dropped the proceedings raised in respect of various allegations against the appellant including the clubbing of clearances and confirmed the total duty demand of Rs.2,48,100/- and imposed equivalent amount of penalty on the following grounds. (Table-2) SL.No. Description Duty demand 1. Alleged clearances of 59 pieces of plywood without duty Rs.2,748/- 2. Clearance of imported plywood without duty Rs.1,19,912/- 3. Clearances of commercial plywood without documents Rs.1,25,440/- Total demand Rs.2,48,100/- 3.2 Appellants are in appeal against such demand. Revenue is also in appeal against the very same Orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ltd., it is his submission that the demand raised at Sl. No.2 & 3 of table-2 were in respect of the inputs which were cleared by the appellants and no cenvat credit was availed. It is his submission that the Adjudicating Authority has not considered this fact but has only blandly mentioned in the Order-in-Original that the appellants had not given any proper explanation. He would submit that they are in a position to correlate the inputs of such plywood and there being no credit availed by them and hence, clearance of inputs has been done by them under respective invoices, hence, no duty is payable. As regards the demand of duty of Rs.2,748/- of alleged clearances of 59 pieces of plywood, he leaves it to the bench. 5. &nb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mand of Rs.6,34,337/- and Rs.7,16,625/- confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority (as reproduced in table - 1 at Sl. No.2 & 3) was never a part of show cause notice. These two demands are clearly beyond the scope of show cause notice and as has been held by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Polymers Co. Ltd. Vs. CCE - 1999 (106) ELT 12 (SC) and followed by various other decisions of the Tribunal. The impugned order confirming the demand of Rs.6,34,337/- and Rs.7,16,625/- and consequent penalties arisen thereon are liable to be set aside and we do so. 7.1 Further, in the case of M/s. Maxworth Plywood Pvt. Ltd., we find that the adjudicating authority has not considered the appellants plea a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere in respect of the inputs cleared as such on which no modvat credit was availed. If this plea is correct, then there cannot be any demand. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that the Adjudicating Authority has not considered this plea in its proper prospective. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the impugned order to this extent also needs to be set aside and we do so and remand the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to reconsider the issue afresh after following the principles of natural justice. 7.3 As regards the demand of shortages and excess found during the physical stock, in this case, we find that the appellant has not been able to give convincing reply for such shor....