2007 (8) TMI 194

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... denied for the period September, 1996 to" August, 1999 on the ground that appellants received less quantity of inputs than shown in the invoices. 2. The contention of appellant is that inputs are residual fuel oil and furnace oil. The same is received from Indian Oil Corporation in tankers. At the time of clearance by Indian Oil Corporation, the weightment is being done by dip stick method and wh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... challenged this order. 3. The contention is that in the present case, the loss is less than 2% and credit cannot be denied that appellants received less inputs as mentioned in the invoices as the duty has been paid on the quantity of goods mentioned in invoices. The contention of revenue is that the appellants are entitled for credit in respect of duty paid on inputs actually received in the fact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of petroleum products received by the appellants after relying upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Neera Enterprises v. CCE, Chandigarh reported in 1998 (104) E.L.T. 382. 5. As the revenue in subsequent period, contended shortage of 2% in respect of petroleum product in appellants own case and revenue has not challenged the order, therefore, the demand in the present case in respect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X