9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 643X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . K. Choudhary, Judicial Member And Shri Devender Singh, Technical Member Shri R. Parthasarathy, Consultant for the Applicant Shri S. S. Chattopadhyay Supdt. (A.R.) for the Revenue ORDER Per: Shri Devender Singh The present appeal is filed by the appellant against the impugned Order-in-Appeal No.11/HAL/2012 dt. 16.03.2012 passed by Commr. of Central Excise (Appeals), Kolkata. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of cement falling under Chapter 25 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and were availing benefit of Notification No.4/2007-CE dated 1.3.2007 as amended. They were manufacturing cement bags as well as cement in bulk and they were also clearing cement in bulk @ ₹ 400/- p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he following case laws: (i) CCE, Noida Vs. India Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd. : 2014 (302) ELT 394 (Tri.-Del.) ; (ii) CCE, Chandigarh Vs. Smatel Electron Devices. : 2010 (254) ELT 529 (Tri.-Del.) ; (iii) Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. CCEx. Jaipur II : 2008 (232) ELT 687 (Tri.-Del.) ; (iv) Siddharth Tubes Ltd. Vs. CCEx. Indore : 2008 (228) ELT 193 (Tri.-Del.) ; (v) P. T. C. Industries Ltd. Vs. CCEx. Jaipur I : 2003 (159) ELT 1046 (Tri.-Del.) ; 4. The ld.A.R.for the Revenue, submits that non-payment of duty was detected during the course of audit and if it was a bona fide mistake, the assessee would have paid the duty either immediately on being pointed out or before issuance of show-cause notice. The duty was not pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the appellant had paid the duty even befeore issuance of show-cause notice. The other case laws cited by the appellant, are related to valuation and classification issues and not where exemption benefit was availed. Besides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Star Industries (supra), has held as under : 35. It was submitted by the ld.counsel for the assessee that the entire exercise is revenue neutral because of the reason that the assessee would, in any case, get Cenvat credit of the duty paid. If that is so, this argument in the instant case rather goes against the assessee. Since the assessee is in appeal and if the exercise is revenue reutral, then there was no need even to fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
