9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ading 8716.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act read with relevant notification permitting adjustment of duty already paid on the inputs against the duty that would be payable on the final products. In the absence of specific challenge to these findings, the contention that landing gear, running gear, etc. did not form components of LPG tankers cannot be accepted. Regarding stay application - while disposing of the stay application, the Commissioner (Appeals) had duly considered the point relating to prima facie case and had accordingly directed the appellants to deposit an amount of Rs. 9,00,000 - Appeal is dismissed - E/2661 of 2001, & E/3861 of 2003 - A/230-231/2011-WZB/C-II/(EB) - Dated:- 8-3-2011 - Shri R.M.S. Khandeparkar, Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of duty to the tune of Rs. 8,06,400/- along with interest was confirmed and penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- was imposed. The said demand related to the period from April, 1999 to September, 1999 in respect of which show cause notice dated 04/01/2000 came to be issued to the appellant, which was contested by the appellant under their reply dated 27/03/2000. 5. In these matters, the following issues arise for consideration: (i) whether non-inclusion of valuation of components / parts like landing gears, running gears, pressure plates, etc. while arriving at their assessable value of the LPG tankers manufactured by the appellant was justified? (ii) whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) would have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning gears fixed with landing gears and pressure plates, which were procured normally from outside the factory.The assessee were also doing the wiring, painting and all the requisite electrical work which was also revealed from the invoices issued by them. In addition, all these facts were duly admitted by the proprietor of the appellant-firm in his statement and there are clear findings to that effect by the adjudicating authority in his order. In the absence of specific challenge to these findings, the contention that landing gear, running gear, etc. did not form components of LPG tankers cannot be accepted. 9. The DR is also justified in placing reliance in the decision of the Tribunal in the matter of Heat Weld vs.Collector of Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation was rejected while extending the period for deposit by 5 days from 24th April, 2001.The appellant, however, failed to deposit any amount and in these circumstances, the appeal came to be dismissed for non-compliance of the order passed in stay application, which was heard and disposed of in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 11. As already seen above, on merits the appellants have no case. In the background as above, the contention of the appellants in relation to this issue that appeal was dismissed in camouflage fashion without appreciating the facts of the case in proper perspective is of no substance. The perusal of the impugned order clearly discloses that while disposing of the stay application, the Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
