COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. CEAT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCORDING to the Revenue, the following questions of law arise out of the order of the CESTAT dated March 4, 2010:

(2.) THE relevant facts are that by an order -in -original dated October 30, 2003 the duty amounting to Rs. 17,96,685 was confirmed for wrongful availment of the credit during the period 1998 -99 with interest and penalty equivalent to the amount of duty under section of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

(3.) IN so far as the first question is concerned, no doubt that this court by its order dated July 3, 2008 had allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue thereby setting aside the order of the Tribunal dated September 5, 2006 in so far as it related to reducing the penalty imposed under section of the Act. However, it appears that confusion had arisen in view of the clarificatory order passed by this court on September 23, 2008, wherein it was recorded that the order of the Tribunal dated September 5, 2006 has been set aside and the matter has been remanded back for fresh hearing. Even though the remand was restricted to the issue relating to the reduction of the penalty imposed under section , the Tribunal by its order dated March 4, 2010 reconsidered the issue relating to the duty and confirmed the duty demand at Rs. 16,04,322 instead of the duty demand already confirmed at Rs. 17,96,685. Challenging the order of the Tribunal dated March 4, 2010 the Revenue has filed the present appeal.