AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (5) TMI 564
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stry, Advs. For the Respondents : Ganesh Haavanur, Authorised Representative (SDR). ORDER T.K. JAYARAMAN, MEMBER (T) 1. These appeals have been filed against the OIO No. C.Ex.22/2005 dated 26.09.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad-IV Commissionerate. 2. The appellants, for the period upto 30.09.2002, received inputs from M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd a personal penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs was imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules. The appellants have strongly challenged the impugned order. 2. S/Shri M.S. Nagaraja and T. Rajeswara Sastry, the learned Advocates appeared for the appellants and Shri Ganesh Havanur, the learned SDR appeared for Revenue. 3. The learned Advocates urged the following: Upto 30.09.2002, the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot be denied on the ground made out by the Revenue. Further in the case of Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Tirunelveli, it has been held that no duty can be demanded on the used Capital Goods, which have been removed. 4. The learned SDR reiterated the orders of the lower authority. 5. On a careful consideration of the entire matter, we are of the view that the present case is squarely covered....