TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 1035
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....missioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned orders. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in manufacture of certain excisable goods like floor coverings, jute matting, auto parts etc. The goods manufactured by the appellant have cleared on payment of duty. As there are some manufacturing defects have been fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t on returned goods and to impose penalty. The Show Cause Notices were adjudicated on the ground that the Cenvat credit has been wrongly availed by the appellant. Accordingly, the adjudication orders were passed by confirming the demand and imposing penalty on the appellant by invoking the extended period of limitation. Aggrieved by the said orders, the appellant preferred appeals before me. 3. L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iod is not invokable. Consequently, the demand and penalty are also not imposable on the appellant. 4. On the other hand, ld. A. R. for Revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned orders. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. On careful consideration of the facts of the case, I find that in this case the demand has been confirmed against the appellant on two grounds:- (i)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s been cleared without any process on payment of duty as scrap by the appellant, the appellant is required to reverse Cenvat credit in terms of Rule 16(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 as no process has been undertaken by the appellant. Therefore, for that part of the order, the demand is confirmed against the appellant. 8. Further, I find that the clearance by the appellant as scrap of these....