9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1933X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rds duty liability in respect of wagon manufactured for them by various wagon manufacturers. There is no reason for the department to take a contrary view in respect of another unit of the appellant on a similar issue, even after acknowledging that the SCN that gave rise to the present proceeding covered in the negotiation between the Ministry of Railways and Department of Revenue. Once the matter is settled and duly accepted by the Department, there is no reason for the same Department though a different office to take a contrary view so far as the present demand of ₹ 15,99,482 for the period 23.02.1987 to 14.04.1987 is concerned. However, the appellants have not filed any Chartered Accountant s Certificate to substantiate thei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gons. The Adjudicating Authority in the Denovo dated 30.01.2004 passed the following order: In view of the above findings, I allow the modvat credit of ₹ 1,29,76,026.32. I also confirm the demand of ₹ 62,44,028.44 for 297 nos. of wagons cleared from the factory during the period from 20.11.86 to 20.2.87 and direct the assessee to make payment of the said amount within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order No penalty is imposed considering the merit of the case. 2. The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that prior to 01.03.1986, goods supplied by the appellant were classified under Tariff item 68 and by virtue of Notification No. 120/75CE dated 30.04.1975, goods were cleared on the basis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. C. No. V(30) 83/MISC/KDH/93/C/4155 dated 24.10.1994, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Khardah Division informed the appellant that the dispute regarding payment of excise duty on wagons manufactured on job work basis has been settled between the Ministry of Railway and Ministry of Finance for the period from 01.03.1975 to 19.11.1986 [Page no. 53-54 of the appeal paper book]. It is also submitted that they had produced the above mentioned letters before the Adjudicating Authority as well as appellate authority, however the same were not given cognizance and demand of ₹ 15,16,343/- in respect of SCN No. C. No. CE-20 (21) / Tex / Sodepur /KDH-II/171 dated 26.02.1987 for the period 01.08.1986 to 22.02.1987 (effective peri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of Revenue. Hence, the demand amounting to ₹ 15,16,343/- pertaining to the SCN No. C No. CE-20(21) / Tex/ Sodepur/KDH-II/171 dated 26.02.1987 for the period 01.08.1986 to 22.02.1987 is not payable by the appellant and is therefore liable to be dropped. We also observe that in regard to SCN No. C No. CE-20(25) / Tex(S)/KDH-II/87398-99 dated 27.07.1987 for the period from 23.02.1987 to 14.04.1987, the appellant while admitting the duty liability, disputed the disallowance of the MODVAT Credit in respect of the duty paid on the free supply inputs received from the Indian Railways. 8. We find that the Tribunal in Appellant s own case (Agarpara Works) vide its order No. A-125/Cal/99 dated 18.02.1999 upheld admissibility of MODVAT C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
