9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs which are used by the food grains procurement agencies like Markfed, Punsup- FCI etc. It was alleged that the covers were exempted from payment of Central Excise Duty but the film used in the manufacture of these covers was liable to duty. Accordingly, a SCN was issued to the assessee on 31-10-1986 asking them to explain as to why duty amounting to Rs. 30,34,806 should not be demanded from them by extending the period of demand as they had suppressed the fact of manufacture/clearance of 368937.900 kgs. of LDPE films with an intent to evade payment of Central Excise Duty. The case was adjudicated by the then Collector, Chandigarh who in his Order-in-Original dated 20-11-1987 confirmed duty of Rs. 30,34,806/- and imposed personal penalty o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n-Original dated 20-11-1987. This Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Commissioner concerned directing the Commissioner observing that : "On the one hand, the adjudicating authority has itself come to the conclusion that the credit of Rs. 17,80,333.66 was admissible to the appellants and on the other hand had confirmed the demand of Rs. 14,31,495/-. The adjudicating authority adjusted the entire amount without assigning any reason. We. therefore, consider it a fit case for remand. Accordingly, we remand this case to the adjudicating authority directing him to pass self-speaking order assigning specific reason as to why the larger amount of credit has been adjusted against the smaller amount of demand. The other issue regarding adjust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore, there was no basis to restrict the credit to the extent of duty paid on the final product. Ld. Counsel, therefore, prayed that the balance amount of about Rs. 3 lakhs should be given as credit in Modvat account. Ld. Counsel submitted that since no additional amount of duty becomes payable, therefore, imposition of penalty of Rs. one lakh was not warranted as there was no intention to evade payment of duty as Modvat of higher amount was available. Ld. Counsel also submitted that the amount Rs. 40,34,806.50 should also be returned to the appellants as this amount was deducted from the refund payable to the appellant. Ld. Counsel, therefore, submitted that the appeal may be allowed. In support of his contention in regard to the am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -speaking order and therefore, remanded back again for passing a self-contained speaking order. He therefore, prayed that the order may be remanded. 6.We have heard the rival submissions. On a careful consideration of the submissions made and the clarifications of the Board as also the evidence on record, we note that the appellants were entitled to the credit of Rs. 17,80,333.66. We also note that the appellants were required to pay the duty of Rs. 14,31,495/-. We find that there is no notification issued by the Govt. of India restricting the credit on inputs to the amount of duty payable on the final product. On the contrary, we find that there are instructions of the Central Board of Excise Customs that situations may occur where the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
