9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v Tandan, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - The appellants herein are engaged in the manufacture of two wheeled motor vehicles falling under Chapter Heading 87.11 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985 and availing the benefit of Modvat credit in terms of Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules. 16 show cause notices covering the period from January, 1988 to Febru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e basis of a GP-I which was not endorsed in favour of the assessees, (d) on the ground that credit of Rs. 16,586.09 had been taken on the strength of gate pass not countersigned/certified by the Central Excise Officer, (e) on the ground that the assessees had availed of notional higher credit of Rs. 15,262.65 and Rs. 1,13,360.09 on special excise duty, which was not admissible (f) on the ground th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e heard Shri G. Shiv Dass, learned Counsel and Shri Mewa Singh, learned SDR and perused the records. 3. Our findings are recorded as under : Denial of credit on the ground that certain inputs have not been declared : The items in dispute are brake drum; boss centre, sleeve panel; aluminium cold rolled coil; liquid polish; hub drive; bituminous mixture; aluminium ingots, metal complete box; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmissibility of credit on these items is also remanded to the Assistant Commissioner in the light of the Larger Bench decision cited supra, which has been followed by the Tribunal in the assessee's own case reported in 2001 (42) RLT 83. Denial of credit on tubular spanner This item is a part of the tool kit. In the light of the Tribunal's decision in their own case cited supra which is based upo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken in excess of 5% Admissibility of these credits is not pressed and hence we uphold the denial of credit on these counts. In view of denial of notional higher credit and deemed credit taken by the assessees, penalty is called for. Having regard to the amount of higher notional credit involved viz. approximately Rs. 1,25,000/- in the adjudication order whereunder penalty has been imposed, we r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
