9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant. The judgement of this Tribunal in Balkrishna Industries case 2013 (1) TMI 324 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI) is inapplicable to the facts of the present case, in view of the fact that there has been change in the definition of input as was in existence in 1997 and now in the provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002/2004. In the changed definition of input under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002/2004, Motor Spirit commonly known as petrol, was excluded from the scope of input, whereas in the definition of input during the relevant period, the goods classified under Chapter Sub-Heading 2710.11 had been excluded from the scope of input. Therefore, Solvent 1425 even if considered as not Motor Spirit and allowed CENVAT Credit to be availed on the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellant filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). The learned Commissioner (Appeals) after taking into consideration the submissions advanced in their grounds of appeal, had disallowed the Credit of Rs.5,17,215.21 on the input, Solvent 1425 and reduced the penalty from Rs.1.00 lakh to Rs.90,000.00. Hence, the present Appeal. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the Appellant has submitted that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in disallowing the MODVAT Credit on the input, Solvent 1425 classified by the input supplier under Chapter sub-heading 2710.11. He has submitted that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate that Solvent 1425 is renamed as Naptha and classified by them un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... initial amount of demand of inadmissible Credit of Rs.9,48,965.81, the Adjudicating Authority taking into consideration the submissions of the Appellant, had reduced the same to Rs.5,48,896.21. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has further reduced the demand from Rs.5,48,896.21 to Rs.5,17,215.21. I find that the only dispute remains unresolved is the admissibility of MODVAT Credit on the input, Solvent 1425 availed by the Appellant during the relevant period. It was the argument of the Appellant that the input- manufacturer/supplier has incorrectly classified the said input under Chapter sub-heading 2710.11, whereas the correct sub-heading should have been 2710.14 in view of the use of the said input in the premises of the Appellant. It i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
