9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shukla Authorised Representative Per: P.K. Das A common issue is involved in these appeals and therefore both are taken up together of disposal. 2. The relevant facts of the case in brief, are that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Table Kitchen and Household Article and parts thereof. There was a dispute of classification and exemption notification. The appellant paid duty unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appropriated an amount of Rs. 6,99,436.00/-, against the outstanding Government dues as per letter dated 28.08.2009. The appellant filed appeal against the said order of adjustment of Rs. 6,99,436.00/- before the Commissioner (Appeals). By the impugned order, dated 06.03.2010 Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal filed by the appellant, against which the appellant filed appeal No. E/535/2010. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvat Credit availed by the appellant on the stock of inputs lying on 27.05.2009, which was utilized for payment of duty on the final product. The appellant contended that they have utilized the Cenvat Credit for payment of duty of the final product. The Learned Advocate submits that on 27.05.2009 the Cenvat account balance was nil. There is no reason for reversal of the credit. He strongly relied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... versed on the final product becoming exemption subsequently. In my considered view, it is required to examine the facts of the case in respect of applicability of the Larger Bench decision. Hence, it is appropriate the matter should be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to decide afresh after considering the submission of both the cases. 6. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
