2016 (11) TMI 1610

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mittal, Sheela Prasad, Abhijit Biswas D.N. Patel,   1) In this Tax Appeal, following substantial question of law has been raised: - "Whether the Tata Ryerson Ltd. (assessee), who ceases to be manufacturer of excisable goods under section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with effect from 02/03/2005 in view of Board's Circular No.811/8/2005-CX dated 02/03/2005, was permitted unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the raw material purchased from Tata Steel by the respondent and thereafter preparing HR Coils by cutting, slitting and strengthening of HR Coils into sheets does not amount to manufacture as per Section 2(d) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The decision rendered by this Court is in Tax Appeal No.21 of 2007 with Tax Appeal No.22 of 2007 with Tax Appeal No.23 of 2007 vide judgment dated 22nd Augus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tely the notice was adjudicated upon and the respondent was held liable for and Cenvat credit was disallowed which was availed upon the exempted goods by the respondent and the duty paid upon the exempted goods were appropriated under Section 11(d) of the Central Excise Act. Penalty was also imposed at Rs. 4,31,60,460.43 upon the respondent vide order dated 27th January, 2006 by the Commissioner o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as held by this Court in Tax Appeal Nos.21, 22 and 23 all of the year 2007, vide order dated 22nd August, 2016. 5) It further appears from the facts of the case that the respondent has paid the duty of Rs. 31,31,59,502.24 upon the HR Coils. As stated by the counsel for the respondent, they have never claimed the refund of the said amount, more particularly, when the respondent has already recov....