9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ohan Bansal & Mr. N.K. Sharma, Advocates for the appellant. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, "the Act") against the order of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 16.12.2009 proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:- A. Whether the Hon'ble Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Supreme Court? E. Whether in view of the fact that the relevant Invoices which were seized by the Department continued to remain with them, the Appellant could be denied the benefit of Input Credit on the ground of failure to produce the relevant Invoices? F. Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal erred in holding that the ROM moved by the Appellant did not make out a case on merits? G. Whet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rocurement of raw material by SFP or showing that SFP had made the requisite export sale. Against the said order, appeal of the appellant was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thereafter, the appellant filed an application for rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Act. It was submitted that necessary details in relation to necessary invoices was furnished to the adjudicating authority fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... showing procurement of raw material by SFP nor showing export sales, was erroneous. We are unable to accept the submission. The order of the Commissioner, inter-alia, reads as under:- "101. BCI has disputed the quantification of duty demanded on the grounds that they are eligible to claim credit of Rs.12,74,311/- being excise duty paid on various inputs used by SFP for manufacturing in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, on which excise duty has been paid. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant relies upon judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Honda SIEL Power Products Ltd. v. CIT 2008 (221) ELT 11 to submit that if there was a mistake attributable to the Tribunal, the Tribunal could correct the same while exercising jurisdiction of rectification and the High Court cannot interfere with the same. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
