2005 (1) TMI 294

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant and Shri K. Sanyal, JDR for the Respondent. 2. Mr. Chakraborty submits that so far the decantation losses is concerned they did not contest the appeal to that extent. They have calculated the amount on this account 28132.28 as per revised calculation and they have already paid Rs. 49556.20 before issue of show cause notice. He submits that the Modvat credit on quantity lost during transi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....notice so the penalty is not imposable. He relied on the following decisions. (a)      Arun Prestressed Concrete Products P. Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore - 2002 (150) E.L.T. 542 (Tri.-Bang.). (b)     Arvind Chemi Synthetic (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III - 2004 (163) E.L.T. 91 (Tri. - Del.). Ld. Commissioner (Appeal) has not made a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as long as established due to adsorption or evaporation of moisture and in accordance with the non-accepted standard for such gain or loss in any industry, Modvat credit not be denied on such difference in weight-Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944." Similar view has expressed in the case of Bhoruka Textiles Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore - 2000 (116) E.L.T. 583 an....