2016 (12) TMI 901

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Department Shri Mayank Garg (Advocate), for the Respondent(s) Per Mr. Anil Choudhary: The Revenue have preferred the present appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 09/CE/ALLD/2013 dated 24-06-2013, whereby the demand of Rs. 18,25,883/- was raised under Rule 3 (5A) of CCR, 2004 read with Section 11 A of the Act, along with interest and further equal amount of penalty was imposed under Secti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... @ 16.40% on the transaction value under sub-rule 5A of Rule 3 of CCR, 2004, applicable with effect from 16-05-2005. The said rule provides if any capital goods are removed as waste and scrap, the manufacturer shall pay and amount equal to duty leviable on the transaction value. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice dated 29-02-2012 was issued for the extended period 2007-08 and further penalty was propo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ecording a finding that there is no indication either in the question or in the answer given by the Authorised Signatory of the plant that the waste and scarp in question had been generated out of capital goods on which they had taken Modvat/Cenvat credit. The findings of the Adjudicating Authority are based on unsubstantiated presumptions and assumptions. 5. Being aggrieved the Revenue is in a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... during the period 1989-92, when no Modvat Scheme had been issued by the Legislature or the Board, the Commissioner (Appeals) have rightly set aside the demand and penalty. 7. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that no case have made by the Revenue that the appellant has taken Modvat/Cenvat credit at the time of acquisition of the plant and machinery which was disposed off as scrap....