2006 (1) TMI 311

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Respondent. [Order per : Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T)]. Heard both sides. The impugned order has been passed by the Adjudicating Commissioner dropping duty demand but imposing penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs for infraction of the rules. On an appeal from the respondents, the penalty has already been set aside vide Indian Seamless Metal Tubes Ltd. v. CCE, Pune - 2001 (137) E.L.T. 218 (Tri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s to their job workers and after receiving the material back have cleared the same with 100-120% value addition and have also paid duty on the same. 3. The department s claim that they are not engaged in manufacturing of the impugned goods and hence they were not eligible to take Modvat credit on inputs which they have sent to their job workers for further processing cannot be sustained as the d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X