TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 19
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the appellants, manufacturers of paper and paper board, availed exemption under Notification No.6/02 dt. 01/03/2002 according to which paper & paper board manufactured, starting from the stage of pulp, in a factory and such pulp contains not less than 75% by weight of pulp made from materials other than bamboo, hard woods, soft woods, reeds or rags is eligible for concessional rate of duty of 8% as per Sl.No.86 thereof. After verification of documents and discrete investigation, a show-cause notice dt. 03/04/2006 was issued demanding duty of Rs. 32,16,906/- for the period August 2003 to September 2005. Another show-cause notice dt. 23/01/2006 was also issued demanding duty of Rs. 23,57,493/- for the period October 2005 to July 2006. The a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....interest and penalty. He further submitted that the Commissioner(Appeals) in the impugned order has wrongly observed that the assessee has not contested the demand for 2003-04 and could not produce any evidence, orally or documentary, before him. He further submitted that the ground of appeal filed before the Commissioner(Appeals) and the written submissions filed before him which is on record, show that the appellant had contested the basis of the demand on merit and limitation based on the document already available on record. He further submitted that the adjudicating authority in para 23 of the order has clearly recorded that JK pulp, unbleached pulp, JK wet pulp etc. are not shown to be not unconventional and hence the same have to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submitted that the appellants have been submitting monthly RT12 / ER1 returns showing the quantity of paper cleared under concessional rate of duty under Notification No.6/2002-CE. He further submitted that appellants have correctly availed the benefit of concessional rate of duty for 2004-05 and 2005-06 as evident from the detailed verification report submitted by the ACCE during the process of adjudication much after the issuance of the show-cause notice. Learned counsel further submitted that the very basis of the allegation of not maintaining the proper record was incorrect and there was no suppression of facts and that is why the adjudicating authority also dropped proceedings for 2004-05 and 2005-06. Further the adjudicating autho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d proper records showing the details of the issue of raw material during the specific period for manufacture of specific type of paper. Further we find that the Commissioner(Appeals) has only confirmed the demand for the year 2003-04 on the ground that the said demand was not contested by the assessee whereas the assessee from the very beginning has contested the demand on merits as well as on limitation and for the year 2004-05 and 2005-06, the original authority has dropped the demands after proper verification. Further we find that in the case of Rolex Paper Mills Ltd. cited supra, the Tribunal has observed in para 4 as under:- 4. On a careful consideration and perusal of the records, we find that the appellants have used waste ....