9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (10) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. This appeal has been directed against the impugned order-in-original vide which the demand of Rs. 10,83,138/- under Section 11D and Rs. 6,18,163/- under Rules 57-I and 57-AD read with Section 11A(1) of the Act with interest and penalty of equal amount had been confirmed against the appellants. 2. The learned Counsel has contended that no dem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the exempted goods. The adjustment of that amount has been wrongly denied to them. He has further stated that after crossing the exemption limit, the appellants paid the duty on the goods and they were entitled to take the credit on the duty paid inputs used in the manufacture of those goods, as per law. Therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside. 3. On the other hand, the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... crossing that limit. The duty under Section 11D has been confirmed on the ground that the appellants charged the duty along with the price of the goods, from the DG S D. But in our view, this ground is not tenable. The price of the goods agreed upon between the appellants and the DGS D was a composite price. The appellants cleared the goods at a nil rate of duty and they specifically reflected thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjustment of this amount. It also remains undisputed that, after crossing the limit, they cleared the goods on payment of duty. They crossed the exemption limit on 3/4th June, 2001. Therefore, they are entitled to the claim of Modvat credit on the inputs utilised by them in the manufacture and clearance of goods, on and after that date. The total amount of credit available to them shall be verifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
