2014 (3) TMI 1033

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ey receive printed tin sheets from Asian Containers, Daman. The unit of the appellant is located in the area specified under Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., dated 14-11-2002 and accordingly, during the period of dispute i.e. from June, 2008 to Feb. 2012, they were availing exemption under Notification No. 56/2002-C.E. The tin containers manufactured by the appellant were being cleared to M/s. Vishal Industries situated in the same building. It was also seen that while the appellant unit - M/s. Vinayak Industries is a partnership concern of Anantnidhi Trust and Shri P. L. Patel, M/s Vishal Industries is also owned by the same partners. In terms of the Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., a unit manufacturing the goods covered by this exemption and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1,52,50,155/- under Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., along with interest thereon under Section 11AB and also for imposition of penalty on them under Section 11AC. This show cause notice also sought imposition of penalty on M/s. Vishal Industries who were receiving the tin containers from M/s. Vinayak Industries. 3. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Jammu & Kashmir vide order-in-original dated 3-6-2013 by which the Commissioner confirmed demand of erroneous refund of Rs. 10,85,040/- against M/s. Vinayak Industries along with interest thereon under Section 11AB and dropped the remaining demand of Rs. 1,23,46,608/- on this count. Besides this, he also confirmed duty demand of Rs. 18,18,507/- again....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nvat credit in some months, there was lesser utilization of cenvat credit for payment of duty and more payment of duty through PLA and higher quantum of refund, this was compensated by more payment of duty through cenvat credit and much less payment of duty through PLA and much lesser quantum of refund under the notification, that as such, situation is revenue neutral, that as regards the duty demand of Rs. 18,18,570/- on account of additional consideration of receipt of corrugated boxes from Vishal Industries, even if the appellant paid this duty, they would have been paid through PLA, and the same would be available as refund and as such, the appellant have nothing to gain from this, that in any case, since even if the tin containers were....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nst them. The first allegation is that they have availed higher quantum of exemption under Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., dated 14-11-2002 by deferring the availment of cenvat credit, as a result of which lesser duty was paid through Cenvat credit resulting in higher quantum of exemption under the notification. However, on going through the Chart given in Para 7 of the show cause notice regarding month-wise percentage of duty payment through PLA, it is seen that though during most of the months, the same has been varying from 38% to 41%, in some months - March, 2011, June, 2011 and March, 2012, the same was 2% and 0%. Prima facie, from this data, it is clear that even if during certain months, lesser amount of duty was paid through Cenvat c....