2004 (4) TMI 482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Respondent. [Order per : Moheb Ali M., Member (T)]. The stay application arose out of the order of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur. In the impugned order he demanded differential duty of Rs. 4,90,51,770/- (BED + AED) under Section 11A and imposed a penalty of Rs. 30,00,000/-(Thirty lakhs) under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. Briefly the facts are that the applica .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appropriate duty on captively consumed yarn inasmuch as he has availed of the benefit of Notification No. 22/96 on and so has to pay 16% Adv. BED + 8% AED on the final product, i.e. Denim fabrics. The applicant discharged duty only at the rate of 8% BED and 4% AED on the final product availing the benefit of Notification No. 14/2002. The Commissioner demanded the differential duty in the impugned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the applicant procures cotton fibre from open market as well as yarn and uses them in the manufacture of Denim. This final product is not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 14/2002 as no appropriate duty was paid on the fibre or yarn used in the manufacture of Denim fabrics. 6. We examined the rival contentions. The Commissioner in the impugned order has taken diametrically opposit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X