2016 (7) TMI 1146

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant. Shri Yogesh Agarwal, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. ORDER The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner, Indore dated 21/07/2008. 2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of dutiable goods such as Sulphuric Acid, Detergent Powder etc. and exempted goods like Single Super Phosphate (Fertilizer). A portion of the sulphuric acid is also clea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the common services was to the extent of Rs. 14,363/- which was also reversed by them alongwith interest on 25/3/2006. 3. The appellant has challenged the impugned order with the submission that for a meager credit of Rs. 14,363/- the demand of over Rs. 80 lakhs alongwith equal amount of penalty is absolutely unjustified. They have argued that in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... lakhs, calculated @ 10% of the value of the exempted products cleared alongwith imposition of a penalty of equivalent amount. But it is easy to see the grossly unjust nature of the demand. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnate Wires (P) Ltd. vs. CCE (supra) has categorically held that on reversal of the Modvat credit, the Assessee cannot be said to have taken credit of duty ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s correctly followed the legal position under the Rules and the ratio of the Apex Court judgment. The Circular of the Board also warranted only recovery of the improperly taken credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) is also right in holding that the duty demand of over Rs. 2 crores in regard to a dispute about availability of over Rs. 6 lakhs credit is grossly unjust. In fact, impropriety and illegali....