9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ys as part of the cost of wagons supplied by the appellants – Sec. 11D provides only for recovery of any amount collected by a manufacturer in excess of excise duty due, hence demand u/s 11D is not justified – stay granted - E/465/2007 - S-250/KOL/2008 - Dated:- 18-3-2008 - S/Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) and D.N. Panda, Member (J) S/Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate along with G.M. Ghos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Texmaco, Belgharia manufactures in addition to the exempted bogies and couplers, dutiable goods. They operate under the Cenvat scheme. They remit 8%/10% of the bogies and couplers in terms of 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2003-2004. The impugned demand relating to the period December, 2003 to February, 2006 has been made under Section l11D of the Central Excise Act on the ground that Texmaco, Sod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to pay excise duty under the Act" envisaged in Section 11D. Therefore, Section 11D did not apply to recover the impugned amount. 3. Ld. Departmental representative submits that the impugned order was passed in accordance with law. He submits the case law of Unison Metals Ltd. v. Commr. of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I reported in 2006 (204) E.L.T. 323 (Tri.-LB) = 2006 (4) S.T.R. 491 (Tri.- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is no dispute that Texmaco, Sodepur is not liable to pay duty on either couplers/bogies or wagons. Moreover, from the records it is amply clear that the appellant had collected the impugned amount in accordance with the express terms contained in the contract with the Railways which described the impugned amount as part of the price of the wagons supplied. Therefore, the impugned order dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
