9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 672X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the painting processes - There is a dispute as to use of these items in or in relation to the manufacture of final product - there is no verification of the use of the items - Relying upon Saraswati Sugar Mills Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III [2011 (8) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - iron and steel structure in Sugar Mills is not eligible for CENVAT credit - the applicant failed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equal amount under Rule 15 of the said Rules and Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The applicant is engaged in the manufacture of Motor Cars. CENVAT credit was denied on 'hollow profiles' and 'panels' used in the assembly of paint shop. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that 'angles, 'channels' etc., were used in 'hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Central Excise, Delhi-III reported in 2011 (270) E.L.T.465 (S.C.) and in the case of Kisan Sahkari Chinni Mills Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow reported in 2012 (283) E.L.T.507 (Tri.-Del.) wherein it was held that iron and steel items used for construction in the structural items are not eligible for CENVAT credit. 6. We find from the adjudication order that the applicant took ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... structure in Sugar Mills is not eligible for CENVAT credit. Hence, the applicant failed to make out a prima facie case for waiver of entire amount of pre-deposit of duty, penalty and interest. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the applicant to deposit a sum of Rs.25 lakhs (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) within a period of six weeks from today. Upon deposit of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
