TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (3) TMI 1195
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Products Equipments (I) Ltd., Taloja, are engaged manufacture of galvanising line, rolling mills, colour coating machines, pickling lines, edge trimming-cum-rewinding lines, corrugating machines, etc. falling under Heading 8455.90 and 9479.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. In the manufacture of these items they manufacture various parts internally and also buy parts from outside. As the products are voluminous in size they are cleared in piecemeal over a period of time but the entire goods are assessed to duty as machinery. The value of bought out parts were also included in the value of the machinery cleared and they are assessed to duty as machinery only. The assessee had undertaken export of these goods under claim for re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Rs. 70,87,398/- availed wrongly by the assessee under Rule 12 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 read with the provisions of Section 11A(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He also ordered recovery of interest under Section 11AB of the Act and also imposed equivalent amount of penalty under Section 11AC read with Rule 13 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002. Hence the appeal. 3. The appellant contends that, in their own case, in Flat Products Equipment (I) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai - III reported in 2000 (115) ELT 629, this Tribunal had held that if parts of machines classifiable as complete machine, if it can be established that parts are removed as such so as to constitute a complete machine, such parts have to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....02/2004 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals)". The Commissioner (Appeals) while upholding the order-in-original of the Dy. Commissioner held that the products of the appellant being voluminous / huge in size took long period to complete the requirements under the contracts the classification of the bought out parts / spares cleared in piecemeal have to be classified under respective machinery and accordingly the Assistant Commissioner sanctioned a rebate amount of Rs. 70,87,398/- 4. The learned DR, on the other hand, would contend that since the bought out parts have not been used in the manufacture of machinery and have been cleared as spares, the appellant is not entitled to claim CENVAT credit thereon and would place relian....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amount of CENVAT credit wrongly availed is exactly equivalent to the amount of excise duty paid by not availing the exemption the consequences is revenue neutral and hence the demand for such wrong availment of credit is not sustainable in law. 7. We also perused the judgments relied upon by the department. In the case of Bihari Silk & Rayon Processing Mills (P) Ltd (referred to supra) the Tribunal was dealing with the question where a show-cause notice issued without quantification of demand but within the amount specified in the notice whether the demands can be confirmed under Section 11A for an amount not being in excess of the amount specified. In that case, it was held that the demand could be confirmed under Sec....