9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 390X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nment of pipes of used nature - the appellant has not produced any evidence to come to a conclusion that the pipes imported by him are sold as capital goods – redemption fine imposed by adjudicating authority is reduced from Rs.1,20,000/- to Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousands only) and penalty is reduced from Rs.60,000/- to Rs.30,000/-against assessee. - C/30/2006 - - - Dated:- 16-3-201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... got the inspection done in front of independent panchas witnesses, and 11 photographs of imported goods were taken. Adjudication order resulted in confiscation of the goods with an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine and the penalty was imposed on the appellant. In second round of litigation, the first appellate authority has rejected the grounds raised by the appellant before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed as capital goods as capital goods definition in CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 includes pipe and pipe fittings thereof. 4. Ld.SDR, on the other hand, submits that the appellant has not provided any evidence as regards the usage of the said pipes as capital goods. It is his submission that the Chartered Engineer s certificate which is produced by the appellant, is not very clear whether the depar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing under the definition of capital goods of Para 9.12. In the absence of any such evidence, we are unable to accept the contention of the appellant that said pipes would fall under the category of capital goods as provided in Para 9.12 of the Policy. 7. In our considered view, that the orders of the lower authorities are correct. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and consideri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
