2013 (6) TMI 830

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Final order No. 859 of 2007, was admitted on the substantial questions of law : - (i) Whether the scrap generated in the manufacture of finished products having negligible value are to be treated as excisable goods or not? (ii) Whether the proviso to Section 3 of the Central Excise Act is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case, for the clearances under dispute inasmuch .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ulting in the levy of duty of ₹ 10,85,732/-, apart from levying equal amount penalty of ₹ 10,85,732/- under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rules 173Q and 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Aggrieved by this, the assessee went on appeal before the CESTAT. The Revenue also filed an appeal before the CESTAT as against the relief granted under Section 4(4)(d)(ii .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ommissioner, however, demanded higher amount of duty, which is an error to be corrected by the Commissioner. As regards the penalty, the Tribunal held that the imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was different from those relevant to the imposition of penalty under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules. In the circumstances, the Tribunal allowed the assessee s appeal and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X