9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 792X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C.E., dated 24-2-2005 it was included at Sr. No. 14 so as to ‘PRESERVE’ the then existing duty structure – Held that:- Once, it is proved that the product in question is excisable, there is no question of denying the option under sub-rule 3(1) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 availed by appellant as a result no liability of differential Cenvat credit as alleged in the SCN arises, when there is no contravention of any of the provisions of the Central Excise Act, confiscation ordered and the penalties imposed needs to be set aside, appeal is allowed X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 were also proposed vide said show cause notice. 4. The respondent adjudicated the show cause notice vide impugned OIO, wherein the demand of differential Cenvat Credit of Rs. 1,14,007/- was confirmed under proviso to Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The amount of Rs. 1,14,007/- already paid by appellant was appropriated. Recovery of interest under section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944 were ordered. Confiscation of molasses was ordered, however, an option was provided to the appellant for release of the same on payment of Redemption fine of Rs. 1,14,007/- within 3 months. Equal penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellant. He explained the appeal and emphasized that Ethyl Alcohol (other than denatured) also called as rectified spirit is exempted vide Notification No. 3/2005-C.E., dated 24-2-2005 at Sr. No. 14 of the table annexed thereto. The product Ethyl Alcohol, if denatured, then it becomes chargeable to duty at appropriate rate. Both the products are covered by single Tariff Heading No. 2207 20 00 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Therefore, Cenvat credit is admissible on the molasses. The case is also covered by the case law reported in 2007 (214) E.L.T. 337 (Tri.-Bang.) in the case of Ugar Sugar Works Ltd. v. CCE, Belgaum. He further stated that the confiscation of molasses is also illegal. 7. I take appeal along with stay app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t tariff. Ethyl alcohol (other than denatured) is an excisable product, therefore in Notification No. 3/2005-C.E., dated 24-2-2005 it was included at Sr. No. 14 so as to 'PRESERVE' the then existing duty structure. Once, it is proved that the product in question is excisable, there is no question of denying the option under sub-rule 3(1) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 availed by appellant as a result no liability of differential Cenvat credit as alleged in the SCN arises. I also find that when there is no contravention of any of the provisions of the Central Excise Act, therefore, the confiscation ordered and the penalties imposed needs to be set aside. 8. Therefore, the Order in Original No. 33/C.Ex/2010, dated 11-6-2010 pass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
