TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 - [Order per] - This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 135/2004(135-A III) CE/DK/Commr(A), dated 8-12-04. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows: (a) The appellant, a manufacturer of beverages, found certain quantity of their finished product not usable and not marketable, and hence sought permission for destroying the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und claim on 6-9-01 i.e. within one year from the date of reversal of their Cenvat credit which was 7-9-00. (e) The original authority denied the claim of refund on the ground that the amount was reversed towards the Cenvat credit as condition of availing remission under Rule 49 of Central Excise Rules, 1944. (f) The Commissioner (Appeals) concurred with the order of the original authority and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f duty of finished goods cannot be equated with the exemption to goods; the credit in respect of the inputs which has gone into the final product destroyed and for which remission granted need not be disallowed. 5. Learned DR reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 6. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. The remission of duty on the finished goods has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
