9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 618X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oth the sides duly represented by Shri S. Suriyanarayanan, learned advocate appearing for the appellant and Shri S.K. Mall, learned DR appearing for the Revenue, I find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of processed fabrics. With the introduction of a special scheme of excise w.e.f. 09.07.04 giving an option to the assessees to clear processed fabrics without payment of duty (withou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal debit entry on 09.07.04 was made due to ignorance, clerical error or misunderstanding and excess credit to the tune of Rs.3,87,635/- was reversed. However the Assistant Commissioner, called for a report from the Jurisdictional Range Superintendent, who vide his letter dated 26.06.07 submitted that the said assessee has not given any explanation as to how they have taken the credit in the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r neither in the impugned order of the Assistant Commissioner nor in the order of Commissioner (Appeals), nor in the appeal memo filed by the appellant it is clear as to on what ground the re-credit of Rs.3,87,635/- was claimed. There is no explicit ground as to what was the mistake in reversing the credit earlier and then re-crediting a small portion of the same again in 2006. However, I find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nit failed to submit compliance till date. 6. As is clear from the above letter also the appellants have nowhere explained the reason for re-crediting the amount. 7. In any case, I find that it is not a case of simple arithmetical calculation errors. The original reversal of the credit in July 2004, with a view to avail the new excise scheme for clearance of the goods without payme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
