- (1.) Rule DB.
(2.) In this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has brought in challenge order, dated 31-5-2004, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 10 lacs as a condition precedent for entertainment of its appeal against order of adjudication dated 30-1-2004.
(3.) The background, in which the petition has come to be filed, is as under : The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of galvanized flattened strips and wires. It was paying Central Excise on the product manufactured by it and in the process, availing Cenvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs used therein, on the strength of a circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (for short, the Board') dated 16-2- 2001. The said circular clarified that drawing of wire from wire rod amounted to "manufacture" and therefore, exigible to excise duty. These instructions were, however, withdrawn by another circular dated 29-5-2003. On 8-4-2003, a notice was issued to the petitioner, alleging that the process of drawing of wires being carried by it did not amount to "manufacture" and therefore, it had wrongly availed of Cenvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs used therein, with the intention of passing on the credit to its buyers. The petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why the Cenvat credit, amounting to Rs. 1,78,83,047/-, availed of for the period from 1-1-2002 to 10-12- 2002, be not recovered from it under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, the Act') read with Rule 12 of the Rules made thereunder. The petitioner was also required to show cause as to why penalty and interest may not be imposed on it.;