2015 (10) TMI 880

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri Govind Dixit, DR ORDER Per Ashok Jindal The appellant has challenged the impugned order confirming a demand of duty of Rs. 73,07,806/- along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty for the period March 2003-March 2005. 2. The facts of the case are that appellant is a manufacturer of motor vehicle and parts thereof. To manufacture the said finished goods the appellant is procu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2(f) of the Central Excise Act 1944. Adjudication took place. Demand of duty along with interest as proposed in the show cause notice were confirmed. Penalty equivalent to the duty was also imposed. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the issue whether electro deposition coating is an activity amounts to manufacture as per....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd the Hon'ble Apex Court in the said case reported in 2015 (318) ELT 353 (SC) wherein appeal of the appellant was allowed holding that the reversal made by the appellant is correct. 4. On the other hand Ld. AR supported the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submission. 6. As in appellant's own case for the earlier period the matter travelled upto the Hon'bl....