TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tral Excise authorities for making any debit entry in the Cenvat records. Hence, in absence of any specific prohibition to that effect, it is not appropriate to disallow the Cenvat benefit, to which the respondent is statutorily entitled to. This Tribunal in the case of Visakhapatnam Steel Plant v. CCE [2002 (3) TMI 169 - CEGAT, BANGALORE] has held that correction of errors and omissions in the entries would not require permission of the Department. - Decided against Revenue. - E/46/2008-SM - Final Order No. 21714/2014 - Dated:- 5-6-2014 - Shri S.K. Mohanty, Member (J) Shri S. Teli, Deputy Commissioner (AR), for the Appellant. Shri J.S. Bhanumurthy, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal has been filed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntiate such stand, he has relied on the decision of Tribunal in the case of BDH Industries Limited, reported in 2008 (229) E.L.T. 364 (Tri.-LB). 4. The learned Chartered Accountant appearing for the respondent submitted that at the time of taking initial as well as subsequent Cenvat credit, the relevant duty paid documents were available with the respondent; that reversal of credit on account of non-availability of documents at that particular moment, does not amount to payment of duty and thus, Section 11B cannot be made applicable to such situation. To defend the case of respondent, the learned counsel has cited the judgment delivered in the case of ICMC Corporation Ltd. v. CESTAT, Chennai [2014 (302) E.L.T. 45 (Mad.)], NOCIL v. CCE, B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utilisation, can be considered just as a mere book entry; and its reversal cannot be equated with the case of self refund as claimed by the appellant-revenue in the present appeal. 7. The issue involved in the present case as to whether suo motu re-credit of the credit already reversed is permissible and no refund claim is required to be filed, is no more res integra in view of the judgment of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of ICMC Corporation (referred supra). Paragraph 13 in the said judgment, relevant for the issue, is extracted below :- We do not subscribe to the view expressed by the Revenue. Admittedly, the assessee originally availed the Cenvat credit on Service Tax for discharging its liability. However, for sound reas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not carry the case of the Revenue in context with the present case, inasmuch as, the issue decided by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal was in respect of duty paid in excess and taking of the said excess credit suo motu by the assessee, avoiding the refund route. The case of the present respondent is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Madras in the case of ICMC Corporation Ltd. (supra), wherein it has been held that refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be insisted upon for making a reverse entry in the Cenvat account, especially when there is no outflow of fund from the assessee. 11. In view of above, the appeal filed by the appellant-revenue against the impugned order has n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
