2017 (4) TMI 276

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri Somnath Shukla, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Yogesh Agarwal, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : B. Ravichandran, Member (T)]. - The appeal is against order dated 30-11-2012 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of aluminium and articles thereof liable to central excise duty. They were also availing Cenvat credit of duty p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....- and imposed equivalent amount of penalty for the extended period of demand. 2. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. Admittedly the appellants cleared some of their final products without payment of duty against International Competitive Bidding and claimed exemption in terms of Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. Since this final product is exempt, the intermediate produ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....b-rule (6). 3. The ld. AR submitted that the exemption for the final product itself has not been categorically established. In such situation, the applicability of proviso in Notification No. 67/95-C.E. cannot be automatically made. However, we note that the original authority discussed extensively the applicability of sub-rules (1), (2) and (3) of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 and there is no menti....