2010 (6) TMI 757

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is filed by the revenue being aggrieved by the final order No.2083/2006 dated 19.12.2006, on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench, Bangalore, vide Annexure 'C' and to restore the order dated 29.11.2006 in Appeal No.206/2005 Central Excise passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bangalore, vide Annexrue 'B', by raising....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s pointed out that the assessee had cleared one number of friction welding machine valued at Rs. 34,00,000/- to M/s. Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai, without payment of duty by availing the benefit of the Notification No.10/97 dated 1/3/1997. Since the assessee had not maintained separate accounts of inputs as per Rule 6(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, they were liable to reverse/pay an a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cord, dismissed the appeal confirming the order passed by the adjudicating authority. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), the respondent-assessee filed Appeal No.Excise/79/06 before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore. When the said matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal, the Tribuna....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Pvt. Ltd., vs. CCE, Nagpur [1996 (81) ELT 3 (SC)] and applying the ratio of the said case to the facts in hand, has reversed the order passed by the assessing authority and held that assessee is not liable to pay 8% of the price of the exempted goods and consequently, allowed the appeal. In view of the reasons assigned in Paragraphs 2 and 4 of the order, we do not find any error of law or irregul....