2012 (6) TMI 123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1.  Heard both sides. 2. Appellant filed this appeal against a demand of Rs 20,12,814/- confirmed and penalty of equivalent under Section 11AC of the Act.  The demand is confirmed after denying the credit in respect of : (i) Beams/Channels/M.S.rounds/CTD bars/Corrugated sheet and walk away stair case; (ii) Electrical Power Generator (11KVA); (iii) Thinner/Primer; (iv) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty of Rs 5000/- under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules.  Subsequently, on 29.6.1999 the present Show Cause Notice was issued demanding duty by denying the credit on the ground that the items in question are not capital goods as per the definition provided under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules.  As the appellant filed necessary documents at the time of taking credit with the mon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... reported in 2011 (270) ELT 465 (SC) to submit that steel structures cannot be considered as parts, accessories or components of the capital goods.  Hence the credit is not admissible. 5. We find that in the present case, Show Cause Notice was issued on 29.6.1999 demanding duty for the period 1994-95 by invoking the extended period of limitation on the ground that the appellant suppressed ....