2015 (11) TMI 232

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... RDER Per Justice G. Raghuram The assessee is the appellant. The appeal is preferred against the order dated 24.5.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Delhi III rejecting appellant s appeal preferred against the primary adjudication order dated 9.2.2010 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Panipat. The primary adjudication order rejected refund claim for Rs. 12,48,993/-. 2. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntitled to avail cenvat credit on input services incurred upto the place of removal which in the case of goods is the port of export. By a further letter dated 17.6.2008, appellant resisted the audit objection and departmental premise regarding appellant s disentitlement to cenvat credit and stated that the amount of cenvat credit availed along with interest ion all amounting to Rs. 12,48,993/- wa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inated in an adjudication order dated 24.12.2009 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Rohtak. This order clearly recorded appellant s disentitlement to cenvat credit but dropped proceedings in view of the fact that the appellant had already reversed the cenvat credit as also remitted interest component vide TR-06 challan, adverted to (supra). The order dated 24.12.2009 however im .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ersed and interest remitted was not legitimate, and could not be sanctioned. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant preferred an appeal which was also rejected by the impugned order. Hence this appeal. 5. Ld. Counsel for the appellant contends that CHA services were utilized by the appellant for facilitating clearance of its exported goods from the port of Export i.e. the place of removal in case of ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... les, 2004 on the appellant for having unauthorizedly availed cenvat credit. This proceeding has become final. 7. In the above circumstances, the appellant cannot be heard to contend that cenvat credit on CHA input service availed by it was valid and legitimately availed. The adjudication order dated 24.8.2009 and the conclusion thereon that the appellant irregularly availed cenvat credit estopps .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X