TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t credit is taken is 127.507 MT and 61.116 MT respectively. - On perusal of the verification report filed by the Range Superintendent and same has been got verified from the record of the appellant. On verification, there was difference of 294 Kg in inputs contained in work-in-progress on which the adjudicating authority has denied the Cenvat credit to the appellant, which might be due to the calculation error. The finding of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is that report of the Range Superintendent is afterthought and is not acceptable as appellant has filed declaration at the time of availing cenvat credit on inputs contained in finished goods, work-in-progress and with the job worker. Therefore, I hold that appellant is entitled to ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2007 to 2007-2008 when threshold exemption limit crossed the appellant, availed the cenvat credit as per Rule 3(2) of CCR, 2004 on material contained in work-in-progress, raw material issued to the job worker and raw material contained in finished goods and filed a proper declaration before the authorities below. On examination of the declaration, cenvat credit sought to be denied on raw material contained in work-in-progress and finished goods. During the course of proceedings, they also reversed the cenvat credit when pointed out. Later on, show cause notice was issued to the appellant to appropriate the amount reversed by the appellant which was adjudicated by the adjudicating authority after obtaining report from the jurisdictional Supe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e relevant portion of records maintained by the party at the material time duly attested by them are sent herewith for ready reference. It is again reiterated that the party was taking credit on the stock in process while crossing the exemption limit and paying duty on the such stocks while opting out and to claim exemption for the next financial year. 6. On perusal of the verification report filed by the Range Superintendent and same has been got verified from the record of the appellant. On verification, there was difference of 294 Kg in inputs contained in work-in-progress on which the adjudicating authority has denied the Cenvat credit to the appellant, which might be due to the calculation error. The finding of the learned Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
