TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im for the same quarter, adjudicating authority note of the various decisions of the Tribunal and held that inasmuch as the same was a procedural violation, which cannot result in denial of substantive benefit to the assessee, the same is required to be condoned - The findings of Commissioner(Appeals) on the said issue are not being assailed by Revenue, inasmuch as find that there is no ground to the above effect -As such, we find no reason to interfere in the impugned order of Commissioner(Appeals), which stand passed by following the Tribunal decision. - E/663-667/2009 - - - Dated:- 12-5-2011 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Dr. P. Babu, JJ. Adjournment request by Assessee. Shri J.S. Negi, SDR for the Revenue. Per: Archana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeals), took note of the Tribunal s decision in the case of CCE Jaipur Vs. Bhilwara Spinners Ltd. 2008 (226) ELT 222 (Tri-Del), wherein identical factual position was available, inasmuch as the appellants had imported duty free material under advance licences and exported goods under advance licences, the Tribunal held that refund of input credit under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 cannot be denied, inasmuch as the appellant had not claimed rebate of duty under Central Excise Rules, 2002. For better appreciation, the Para 8 of the said decision is reproduced. 8.In view of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ispat Industries Limited (supra) refund claim under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules cannot be denied unless the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... effect. The challenge in the present appeal is to Commissioner(Appeals) s finding for allowing refund claim of credit in terms of Rule 5, on the ground of availing of the benefit Notification No.93/2004-Cus, amounts to double benefit to the assessee. However, we find that the appellate authority has relied upon the precedent decisions of the Tribunal. It is not the Revenue s contention that the ratio of the Tribunal s decision is not applicable to the facts of the present case. In fact, they have contended that the said decision of the Tribunal has not attained finality as the department preferred an appeal before Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat at Jodhpur and the same is pending for decision. Ld.SDR, however, fairly agrees that there is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
