2003 (9) TMI 437

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... B. Nair, Member (T)]. Appellant is a manufacturer of steel bars, rods, etc., which were liable to duty under Chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff. With effect from 1-8-97, units like the appellant s were brought under Compound Levy Scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Waste and scrap generated after 1-9-97 in a unit under Compound Levy Scheme were also exempted under Notif .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that there was no intention to evade payment of duty. It is also pointed out that the computation of duty has been done erroneously, inasmuch as the entire amount realised on the sale of the waste and scrap in question has been treated as assessable value instead of treating the price realised as cum-duty. It is submitted that such a valuation is contrary to law laid down by the Apex Court in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e inasmuch as there was no exemption in regard to waste and scrap produced prior to the introduction of compounded levy scheme. However, the appellant s submission in relation to method of valuation is required to be accepted as it is in conformity with the well settled valuation principles. Their submission on the question of penalty also merits acceptance in the facts and circumstances of the ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X