9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he amended provision and for which no information is required for holding that this reduced amount is payable. In view of the above, I remand the matter to the Adjudicating authority to re-quantify the demand amount following the proviso to Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. I also find that even prior to period 13/11/2007 i.e. before the amendment the issue was contentious and there are various judgments wherein it was held that in absence of any provision for payment of any duty on removal of capital goods, no demand can be made. Considering this legal position at the relevant time, I am of the view that penalty is not imposable in the present case, hence the penalty is waived - appeal disposed off - matter remanded back. - APPEAL N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir vendors for new engraving/dechroming by the appellant on their delivery challan without preparing invoice and without payment of Central Excise duty. Show cause notice was issued contending that in view of provision of sub rule (5) of Rule 3 of the CCR, 2004 appellant is required to reverse the Cenvat credit availed on the engraving/dechroming /rechroming of cylinder. The Adjudicating authority confirmed charges in the show cause notice and accordingly confirmed the demand of Cenvat credit, also imposed the penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules. Being aggrieved by the Adjudication Order dated 30/6/2009, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeal) who rejected the appeal. In the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) as r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pital goods cleared after use, should be quantified by reducing 2.5% for each quarter. I do not find any reason why this amended provision should not be extended to the appellant. The Ld. Commissioner could have atleast allowed this reduction following the amended provision and for which no information is required for holding that this reduced amount is payable. In view of the above, I remand the matter to the Adjudicating authority to re-quantify the demand amount following the proviso to Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. I also find that even prior to period 13/11/2007 i.e. before the amendment the issue was contentious and there are various judgments wherein it was held that in absence of any provision for payment of any duty on re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
