9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ord, are that the respondent-assessee M/s Neel Kanth Rubber Mills (for short "the assessee") was manufacturer of T.R. Belting and Conveyor Belting and was availing the Cenvat credit of duty on inputs, under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. During the course of audit of the records, it was noticed by the officers of the department that the assessee had imported certain raw material under the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (for brevity "the DEPB"), on which additional duty of customs i.e. CVD had been debited from DEPB account and had not been paid in cash. 3. The revenue claimed that since the assessee wrongly availed the Cenvat credit, so, a show cause notice (Annexure A1) was issued to it (assessee), as to why the amount of Cenvat credit alongw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 02.12.2005. 2. I sanction refund claim of Cenvat Credit of Rs.1,55,599/- (Rs.1,52,548/- CVD + Rs.3,051/- Education Cess) to the noticee by way of credit in their Cenvat Credit account. 3. I sanction refund claim of Rs.15,200/- by way of Cheque on account of interest deposited by the noticee on 20.08.2005." 6. Aggrieved by the order (Annexure A2), the assessee filed the appeal, which was accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals), vide order dated 9.6.2006 (Annexure A3) and set aside the duty of demand and penalty. However, the appeal filed by the revenue against the order of Assistant Commissioner (Annexure A2/1), was rejected, vide order dated 1.11.2007 (Annexure A3/1). 7. Again aggrieved by the orders (Annexures A3 and A3/1), the reven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of credit of CVD debited through DEPB account, in that eventuality, the revenue cannot deny the benefit of Cenvat credit to the assessee, in the obtaining circumstances of the case. We are of the considered opinion that the Adjudicating Authority has rightly dropped the proceedings and refunded the amount of Cenvat credit to the assessee, vide order (Annexure A2/1), which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Appellate Tribunal.
12. No other legal infirmity in the impugned order has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the revenue.
13. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the present appeal is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
(Ashutosh Mohunta) Judge
(Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge
22.4.2010 X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
