2016 (12) TMI 1054

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. ORDER Per Archana Wadhwa: The dispute in the present appeal relates to admissibility of Cenvat credit of Rs. 75,964/- availed by the assessee on the inputs, which stand sent by him directly to their job workers factory from the sellers premises. 2. Revenue had issued a Show Cause Notice to the appellant on the ground that the invoice, on the basis of which the credit has been avail .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rectly to the job workers factory, the appellants have not shown that the semi finished goods were received back in the factory within 180 days. He has also not found favour with the appellants plea of the demand being barred by limitation. 3. I find that originally the notice alleged denial of credit on the ground that the inputs were not received directly in the assessees factory and were sent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... such allegation of non-receipt of goods from the job worker, the denial of credit to the appellant is not justified. 5. Apart from above that credit was availed by the appellant on 2010-2011 whereas show cause notice stands issued on 14.1.2013, by invoking the longer period of limitation. The credit was availed by the appellant by reflecting the same in statutory documents and there is no evidenc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X