TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 889X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0086/2015-SM - 21068/2017 - Dated:- 9-3-2017 - Shri SS Garg, Judicial Member Shri Krishnamurthy, Consultant - For the Appellant Shri ND Jagdish, Superintendent (AR) - For the Respondent ORDER The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 30.09.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellants are holders of Central Excise Registration Certificate No.AAACU1896MXM002 for manufacture of Rotary Table falling under Chapter sub-heading 84669310 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and availing Cenvat Credit under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 CCCR for short). Department Audit Team observ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise, Peenya IV Range, Bangalore, Show-cause notice was issued demanding an amount of ₹ 1,37,778/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy Eight only) along with interest and penalty. After following the due process of law, the original authority vide Order-in-Original confirmed the demand along with interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner who also upheld the order of the lower authority and hence the present appeal. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed by ignoring the binding judicial precedents. He further su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mission, he relied upon the following decisions: a) Doshion Ltd. Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad 2013 (288) E.L.T. 291 (Tri.-Ahmd.) b) Durferrit Asea Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Guntur 2010 (258) E.L.T. 414 (Tri. -Bang.) c) Mercantile and Industrial Development Company Ltd., Shri S.B Sheth, Shri K. P Brahmbhatt, Shri A C Shah Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad 2013-TIOL-1364-CESTAT-AHM 4. On the other hand the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record and the judgment relied upon by the counsel for the appellant, I am of the view that the appellant's case is covered by the decision relied upon by the appellant in the case of Durferrit A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
