9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate ORDER The brief fats of the case are that the respondent is engaged in the manufacture of Paper based decorative Laminates, Formaldehyde, Pest form Particle Board, Pest Form MOP Board, impregnated Paper & Furniture article etc. The appellant avails cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods used in or in relation to manufacture of the said final products. D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e job worker, who is one of the group concern of the appellant, there was no requirement for reversal of cenvat credit. 2. Shri R.K. Gupta, the ld. D.R. appearing for the Revenue appellant submits that the condition of Rule 4 (5) (a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 has not been fulfilled by the appellant in as much as the capital goods removed for job work have not been received back withi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of knowledge regarding the activities of the appellant of sending the goods for job work, the same is clearly barred by limitation of time. 4. Heard the ld. Counsels for both sides and perused the records. 5. Sub Rule (5) (a) of Rule 4 allows removal of input or capital goods to a job worker for carrying out the required processes subject to the condition that if the job worked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, I find force in the submissions of the ld. Advocate for the respondent that the show cause notice is barred by limitation, having been issued after a period of one year from the date of knowledge regarding sending of capital goods to the job worker. On perusal of the records, I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has not considered the limitation aspect and allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
