CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944

Section 11A(1)

Demand of excise duty - Clandestine removal - Inputs on which assessee had availed Modvat credit -

Assessee was engaged in manufacturing of aluminum conductors and was availing Modvat Credit on Aluminum Wire Rod. Issue under consideration as to whether CESTAT was correct in setting aside the demand holding that allegation of duty evasion by clandestine removal based only on calculation of raw material fed into process or on the working of machinery as noticed during the inspection, was not sustainable, when there was no tangible evidence in support of such allegation. Held: Modvat credit demand was based on the difference between consumption of aluminum wire rods calculated by the departmental officers based on the approximate mass per kilometer (Km.) of various types of aluminum alloys standard conductors given in the ISI standard and consumption of aluminum wire rod as recorded by assessee company in its Central Excise records. Merely on the basis of approximate weight of wire in terms of Kg. per Km. for different types of aluminum conductors given in the ISI standard, the allegation of clandestine removal of on which MODVAT credit was availed of aluminum wire rods could not be made. Revenue had not been able to point out any error or illegality in the findings recorded by Tribunal, warranting interference by this Court.

REFERRED : Oudh Sugar Mills Ltd. v. UOI 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 172) (S.C.), Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Ghansham Bassi 2016 (332) E.L.T. 714 (P & H) : 2016 TaxPub(EX) 322 and Equipment Conductors & Cables Ltd. v. C.C.E., Delhi-V 2015 (323) E.L.T. 600 (Tri.--Del.) : 2015 TaxPub(EX) 1935

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour

A.Y. :

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT