TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 893X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty credit available thereon were not done - in the absence of any challenge to Chartered Accountant’s Certificate, and any contrary evidence to suggest that the inputs/raw material which were consumed by the assessee were not duty paid, order is correct and legal. Appeal of the Revenue being devoid of merits is rejected - E/972/2009 - 1321/2010 - Dated:- 29-10-2010 - Shri M.V. Ravindran, J. REPRESENTED BY : Ms. Sudha Koka, SDR, for the Appellant. Shri B.V. Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against order-in-original No. 14/2009-C.E., dated 6-8-2009. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are M/s. Vijaya Packers, Kizhakkempattumara, Trichur (hereinafter referr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide show cause notice C. No. V/17/15/1/90 CX. Adj., dated 7-11-90 issued by Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Cochin. 3. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demands raised in the show cause notice for the period 1-3-1996 to 11-5-1990. Aggrieved by such an order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the lower authorities to reconsider the issue on the points of manufacture, valuation, limitation and imposition of penalties. In the de novo adjudication, vide order-in-original dated 30-10-2006, again the demand was confirmed by the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved by such an order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide Final Order N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit, even if proper procedures are not followed. For this proposition, he would rely upon the following case laws : (1) CCE, BBSR-II v. Re-Rolling Mills [2003 (159) E.L.T. 192 (T-Kol.)] (2) Chamundi Steels Re-Rolling Mills v. CCE, Bangalore [1996 (81) E.L.T. 563 (T-Del.) (3) Vivek Re-Rolling Mills v. CCE, Chandigarh [1994 (73) E.L.T. 660 (T-Del.)] (4) Apex Steels (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh [1995 (80) E.L.T. 368 (T- LB). 6. I have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. The issue involved in this case is whether the learned Commissioner was correct in allowing the benefit of Modvat credit to the respondents in this case or not based upon Chartered Accountant s certificate on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs of this case. The certificate had been submitted to the Assistant Commissioner, Trichur for verification and quantification of duty. Since the above Chartered Accountant s certificate had already been accepted in the earlier proceedings of the case, I do accept the same to quantify the duty liability from 7-3-1990 to 11-5-1990. The duty liability for the period from 7-3-1990 to 11-5-1990 is computed to comply with the directions of the Hon ble CESTAT s Final Order No. 689/2008 dated 6-6-2008, which has become final in this case. I have perused the quantification of duty and the same are as given below. Duty payable from 7-3-1990 to 30-4-1990 = Rs. 2,56,71,3/- Modvat credit for the period 7-3-1990 to 30-4-1990 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
