AUTO SHELL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises from Order -in -Original No.1/97 dated 1.1.97 by which the Commissioner has confirmed the demand of Rs.1,76,959/ - in terms of Rule 9(1) of CE Rules read with proviso to Section 11A (2) of Central Excise Act. There is a mandatory penalty under Rule 173Q and Section 11AC of CE Act 1944. The appellants had removed rough castings to their job worker under Rule 57F (3) from the arisen waste and scrap during the manufacture of final products at the job worker's place. In terms of law, the waste and scrap was required to have been returned to the appellants or duty paid on it by the job worker. As both was not done, demands were raised and confirmed.

(2.) The appellants' contention is that they had removed 11.9 Kgs. of castings as raw material under Rule 57F(3). The waste and scrap was to an extent of 1.1kg. On which duty was required to have been paid. In order to avoid all complications, they have paid duty without taking abatement on the castings on the entire weight of 11.9 kgs. removed to the job worker. Therefore, they contend that question of paying duty again on waste and scrap did not arise. This plea was put forward before the Commissioner who has agreed to the fact that duty was aid on the gross weight of the castings but however, has not taken into consideration their plea to give set -off to the waste and scrap to the extent of 1.1kg., hence this appeal.

(3.) Heard Ld. Chartered Accountant Shri Suresh and Shri Soundararajan, Ld. DR.