Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (4) TMI 425

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8, E/341/2008 & E/359/2008 - 40203-40219/2017<br>Central Excise<br>Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Technical Member Shri R. Parthasarathy, Advocate, For the Appellant Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR), For the Respondent Per D.N. Panda S. No Cause List S. No. Appeal Arising out of Amount (in Rs.) 1. 22 E/214/2008 OIA No.27/2008-CE dt.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1,19,940 10. 33 E/333/2008 OIA No.58/2008-CE dt. 10.4.2008 Amount-1,91,996 Penalty-1,91,996 Appellant says that a common issue involved in the above batch of appeals is as to whether handling charges and postage shall form part of the assessable value. Similar issue was before the Bench in Appeal No.E/1090 & 1102/2005 which was disposed of by Final Order No.41665-41666/2016 dt. 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Consequently, the aforesaid 10 appeals are allowed only to this extent. S.No. Cause List S.No. Appeal Arising out of Rule 6 Amount (Rs.) 1. 19 E/204/2008 OIA No.15/2008-CE dt. 25.1.2008 Amount Rs. 13,04,576 Penalty-5,00,000 2. 20 E/205/2008 OIA No.18/2008-CE dt. 25.1.2008 Amount Rs. 3,66,946 Penalty-15,000 3. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 6. Law is very clear that above said rule has application where an assessee manufactures both dutiable final product as well as exempted final product. But in the present batch of appeals, appellant has not at all manufactured any exempted final product. What that was the outcome in the course of manufacture of dutiable final product was scrap. Therefore, appl....