TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justified? - Held that: - the Appellant declared ‘Bitumen drum’ under the category ‘final product’, instead of as ‘input’. It is the contention of the Appellant that they are engaged in the manufacture of petroleum products and not ‘drums’, hence, the bitumen drum, which was by mistake shown as their final product, should be considered as an ‘input’ used for packing of bitumen, a fact never disput ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry declaration as required under Rule 57G of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. Since the input packing material viz. Bitumen Drums was shown against the column final product , instead of input , demand notice was issued for recovery of credit. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed. On Appeal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals), rejected their appeal, hence, the present appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DVAT Credit availed on such input drums cannot be denied merely for the reason that input packing drum was shown under the column final product. 5. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 6. We find that the only reason for denial of MODVAT Credit to the Appellant was that a proper declaration for the input viz. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
