2003 (11) TMI 143

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... )]. - The appellants are aggrieved by the demand of duty of Rs. 12,85,644.70 confirmed against them by the Commissioner and also against the penalty of equivalent amount and interest in respect of iron and steel scrap. 2. The allegation is that they have removed iron and steel scrap in contravention of Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11A(1) of the Act. Show cause not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h sides and perused the record. 5. The impugned order does not bring any evidence on record to counter the submission made by the appellants that they have not taken any Modvat credit in respect of the steel material brought in their factory. The question of recovering duty on the inputs (steel material), which gets converted into waste and scrap can arise only in the event the appellants were cl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the process of construction of the plant. The question of collection of any duty on the waste and scrap can arise only in the case where credit was taken on the material. There is no finding on this aspect of the matter in the impugned order to hold that the credit on the steel material was indeed taken, at the point of receipt of the material in the factory. In the impugned order, no finding is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X