9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esh Nair, Member(Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member(Technical) None for the Appellants Shri. Ajay Kumar, Joint Commissioner(A.R.) for the Respondent Per : Ramesh Nair M/s Hanil Era Textiles Ltd, 100 % EOU engaged in the Manufacture of various yarns viz. Acrylic, viscose, cotton blended yarn falling under chapters 54, 55 52 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985, were issued with show cause notice No V (11 A) Adj/4 -64/03-0471129 dated 31-3-2004, which sought to recover duty of ₹ 49,56,990/- for the period March 2003 to December 2003. The gist of the notice was that the noticee had not paid the additional duty of excise under the Additional Duties of Excise (Textiles and Textile Articles) Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt was rejected. In the said order dated 30-08-2016. This Tribunal has given the following findings: 6. We have perused the contention of appellant that they have convincing proofs of domestic procurement of raw materials. We, however, do not feel that mere procurement of raw materials entitles them to eligibility to notification no. 23/2003-CE at serial no. 3 without it being put to use for such manufacture. No evidence has been submitted of the separate accountal and issue of raw materials in the manufacture of goods that were cleared domestically. This submission is not backed by any proof of procurement of all raw materials from domestic sources and, in the absence of such evidence, we cannot but concur with the original authority t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the appellant. Appellant chose to pay duties under a notification for which they were not eligible. Such a failure is not attributable to lack of knowledge considering that appellant had obtained all the clearances from the Development Commissioner as is mandated in serial no.2 of table in notification no. 23/2003-CE which lays down condition for eligibility to duty concession of half of the aggregate duties otherwise leviable on imported goods. The availment of extended period of limitation and imposition of penalty under section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be faulted. 9. For the above reasons, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order and reject the appeal. As per above decision of the coordinate ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
