2018 (1) TMI 490

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (in short, "the Tribunal") in Appeal No. E/1506/2011, claiming following substantial questions of law:- (i) "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed a grave error of law in allowing the appeal of the respondent ignoring the provisions of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for clearance of excisable by-products arisen during manufacturing process cleared for consideration from factory? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed a grave error of law in holding that the appellant is not liable to pay 10% of the total value of the said excisable goods cleared at "NIL" rate of duty and allowing the appeal wit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8 to September 2008 and failed to pay an amount equal to 10% of the total value excluding sales taxes in terms of Rule 6(3) of the Rules. Accordingly, show cause notice dated 8.3.2009, Annexure A.1 was issued to the respondent-assessee. The said show cause notice was adjudicated vide order dated 3.2.2010, Annexure A.2, confirming the demand of Rs. 23,20,963/- alongwith penalty of equal amount and interest at applicable rates. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Vide order dated 18.4.2011, Anenxure A.3, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal filed by the party and upheld the order dated 3.2.2010. Still not satisfied, the respondent assessee filed an appeal before the....