TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... situation held that the demand as barred by limitation. In the present case, the submission of the appellants as revealed from the adjudication order, was not considered by the Commissioner (Appeals). In our considered view, the facts of the case and the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court as cited by the Learned Advocate are required to be examined by the adjudicating authority in the int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 010 that the appellant availed CENVAT credit on the basis of invoice no. 558 and 559 both dated 10.02.2005 issued by M/s. Shree Laxmi Trading Co. 3. By the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the credit was availed on the basis of further documents. The appellants have not been able to establish genuineness of the documents. The Learned Advocate drew the attention of the be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of Central Excise, Chandigarh V/s Malerkotle Steels Alloys (P) Ltd. Cited in 2003 (156) E.L.T. (Tri. -Del.). As per that Cenvat is admissible when assessee inputs alongwith duty paying documents issued by the registered dealer. 2. They have again submitted that in their case, they have all the proof that the supplier were genuine were in existence at the time of supply of yarn to them. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Prayagraj Dyeing Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India 2013 (290) E.L.T. 61 (Guj.) on the identical situation held that the demand as barred by limitation. In the present case, the submission of the appellants as revealed from the adjudication order, was not considered by the Commissioner (Appeals). In my considered view, the facts of the case and the decision of the Hon bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
