9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 595X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid 50% duty on the removal of capital goods and the same amount was availed by them therefore this issue is contentious that whether the duty against Cenvat credit of 50% should be 100% or 50%. The appellant have not contested demand and paid the same alongwith interest - Regarding the credit on measuring instrument also, the appellant have paid duty alongwith interest without contesting the same - As regard the duty of freight, it is settled in various judgments that merely because the freight amount was not separately shown in the excess invoice, deduction cannot be disallowed. The duty cannot be charged on the freight accordingly demand of ₹ 84,428/- on account of freight is not sustainable - we do not find any malafide intention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shortage of finished goods valued ₹ 1,36,122.70 ₹ 21,780/- (c) On removal of capital goods excise duty Paid only 50% whereas it should be 100% as per Rule 3(4) of CCR ₹ 75,720/- (paid alongwith interest) (d) Credit availed on measuring instrument but same was not found in the factory ₹ 17,716/- (paid alongwith interest) (e) Penalty under Section 11AC ₹ 1,99,644/- ₹ 1,99,644/- II. II. Excess stock of finished goods was found Valued at ₹ 95,158/- redemption fine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he freight is deductible in case of sale of goods on principle to principle basis, from the factory gate which is not under dispute. In this regard he placed reliance of Hon ble Supreme Court decision in case of Commissioner of Customs Central Excise Nagpur Vs. Ispat Industries [2015(324) ELT 670(S.C.)] He further submits that in the present case, it can be seen that there was no malafide intention to evade the payment of duty, despite debatable issues of Cenvat Credit the appellant have deposited amount alongwith interest and the entire case is within the normal period of limitation therefore penalty imposed under Rule 26 on the Managing Director and Employee of the company is also not sustainable. 3. Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Ld. Su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore merely because of shortage found in physical stock it cannot be said that there is clandestine removal. As regard the excess stock, we found that total value of the excess goods was ₹ 95,158/- whereas redemption fine was imposed to the tune of ₹ 55,000/- which is on very higher side therefore the redemption fine deserve to be reduced. As regard the demand of Cenvat Credit in respect of capital goods, we find that appellant have paid 50% duty on the removal of capital goods and the same amount was availed by them therefore this issue is contentious that whether the duty against Cenvat credit of 50% should be 100% or 50%. The appellant have not contested demand and paid the same alongwith interest. Regarding the credit on meas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
