2017 (12) TMI 440

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The issue in this appeal is whether show cause notice have been rightly issued on presumption of removal of scrap without payment of duty. 2. The brief facts as per the show cause notice dated 04 March, 2008 relating to the period 2003-2004 to 2005-2006 are as follows:- "Whereas it appears that they have availed the credit of cenvat duty of R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nnexure "A" reveals that there is no corresponding production against the inputs 82.058 MT in the year 2003-04, 82.748 MT in the year 2004-05 and 134.832 MT in the year 2005-06. The records also do not show any removals of the inputs as such on payment of duty. Therefore, it appears that the same have been removed clandestinely without payment of duty in contravention of Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Cr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f TR-6 No-8 dated 30.08.2006 and 7 dated 09.10.2006. In respect of payment of interest amounting to Rs. 41,134/-, they have enclosed the copies of TR-6 No.11, 12 and 13 all dated 04.12.2006. On perusal of their letter dated 11.12.2006, it appears that they have calculated the figures of MS scrap @ 14% on the basis of their agreement with M/s Alstom Ltd. Naini now M/s Areva T&D India Ltd.). The scr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nfirmed with interest. Further penalty was imposed of equal amount under Section 11 AC read with Rule 15(2) of CCR, 2004 alongwith further penalty of equal amount under Rule 15(1) of CCR 2004. Being aggrieved the appellant-assessee preferred appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order was pleased to uphold the Order-in-Original, save and except the modification that th....