2011 (6) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... i Madhusudhanan, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants states that the appellants received furnace oil from M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. under an invoice and they have taken credit of the duty amount reflected in the said invoice. As such, they have not committed any irregularity.   3. However, it is the Department s case that M/s. IOCL was not the manufacturer for the impugned g .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on them as indicated in the Order-in-Original itself. He also states that the fact of availing excess credit over and above the actual duty paid was not disclosed to the jurisdictional officers in-charge of the appellant s factory within the normal period necessitating raising of the demand within the extended period.   5. In view of the fact that the duty amount paid by M/s. CPCL to the ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by M/s. CPCL. Under the circumstances, the excess amount of Rs.17,073/- of credit taken by the appellants over and above the actual duty paid to the exchequer by M/s.CPCL requires to be made good by the appellants along with interest on the same. It is up to them to seek compensation for the said amount from M/s. IOCL who are responsible for wrong invoicing in the first place. As regards the pen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X