2012 (7) TMI 907

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he scrap, the appellant were required to pay duty under Rule 57 S(2)(c) of Central Excise Rules, 1944, as this scrap was of  old and used capital goods in respect of which  modvat credit had been taken and hence, at the time of clearance of this scrap, in terms of the provisions of Rule 57S(2)(c), excise duty as specified thereunder was required to be paid. On this basis, a show cause notice was issued for demand of duty to the tune of Rs. 9,37,448/-  alongwith interest and also for imposition of penalty. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Addl. Commissioner vide order-in-original  dated 8.6.2000 by which the demand as made in the show cause notice was confirmed along with interest and besides this, penalty of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pport of the impugned order. He has contended that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeal for the reason that the plea taken by the appellant is only an after-thought  and is not substantiated by any documentary evidence. Shri A.K. Jain submitted that the appellant did not produce any evidence to show that they had not availed modvat credit in respect of the goods which ultimately resulted in scrap cleared by them. 5.We have considered the rival contentions and perused the impugned order including the order-in-original. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has dealt with the plea of the appellant in following manner:- I have carefully gone through the Order-in-Original, grounds of appeal and writte....