9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2010 (3) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. [Order]. - This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 83 & 84 CE/Appeal/BPL/07-08 dated 21-8-2007. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellant is a manufacturer of excisable goods such as transformer tanks, high pressure valves, pipe fittings. They have two units separated by a distance of about 1 Km. The second unit was registered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... six fabricated columns valued at Rs. 1,05,906/- but allowed the same to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 5,000/-. He confirmed demand of Rs. 80,730/- on 18 columns. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,000/- under Rule 25 and Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Against the said order, both the Department and the party filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or setting up the Unit-II. If there was any violation, it was technical in nature and question of imposition of penalty under Section 11AC did not arise. 4. Ld. SDR submits that columns fabricated in Unit-I should have been removed only on payment of duty and since they are getting erected in Unit-II, they were not be eligible for Cenvat credit also. He reiterated the reasoning of the Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore, hold that the assessee is liable to pay a penalty of Rs. 80,730/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty only) under Section 11AC ibid." 5. I have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides. Undisputedly, the appellant are having two different units. The columns fabricated using inputs on which Cenvat credit has been taken by Unit-I were removed to Unit-II for erect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
