2009 (2) TMI 131

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....- The impugned order vacated order of demand of differential duty found to have been payable by the respondents on removal of credit-availed capital goods 'as such'. The respondents had received a diesel generating set in the year 1994 and availed CENVAT credit of Rs. 88,909/-. In September, 2004, the said DG set was removed on sale. They paid an amount of Rs. 4,896/- towards duty on the capital ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oval of used capital goods was also removal of capital goods 'as such'. Rule 3(4)(c) of CCR, applied to such removals. Arguing the case of the Revenue, the learned JDR relies on a Larger Bench decision of this Tribunal in Modernova Plastyles Pvt. Ltd. v Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad reported in 2008 (232) E.L.T. 29 (Tri.-LB) which had interpreted the scope of Rule 3(4)(c) of CCR. It is su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ally availed has to be reversed by the assessee. This legal position has been settled by the Tribunal in its decision in the case of Modernova Plastyles Pvt. Ltd. cited by the learned JDR. However, the Show Cause Notice issued proposing demand for differential duty had been issued in February, 2006 whereas the short reversal of credit/short-payment of duty had occurred on removal of capital goods ....