9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 619X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) (Oral)]. - In terms of the impugned orders, the appellants are required to pre-deposit the following amounts. Sl. No. Appeal No. Duty demanded Penalty imposed period 1. E/Stay/435/2008 in E/614/2008 (i) Rs. 2,92,63,562/-(BED) + Rs. 5,73,795/-Ed. Cess along with Interest u/s 11AB Rs. 2,92,63,562/- April 2006 to Oct. 2006 (i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd sunflower oil. Revenue proceeded against the appellants on the ground that they had not been maintaining separate accounts for inputs used in dutiable and exempted products. Consequently, the Adjudicating Authority demanded an amount of 10% on the sale value of the exempted product namely sunflower oil. The learned advocate submitted that the appellants had actually been maintaining separate ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal product, then the assessee would not be entitled to the benefit of Rule 57D in view of the provisions of Rule 57CC as it refers to set off/adjustment of duty payable. 6. We are not required to examine the above issue for the simple reason that on the facts of the present case, as can be seen from the extract quoted from the show cause notice, which is the foundation of the demand made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. 5. On a very careful consideration of the issue, we find that the amount of 10% demanded by the department in these cases is highly disproportionate to the Cenvat credit attributable to the inputs used in the exempted product. For example, in a case where the Cenvat credit attributable is of the order of Rs. 2.5 lakh, the 10% of the amount turns up to be Rs. 160 lakh. The demand of such a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
