2017 (1) TMI 698

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed against Order-in-Appeal No. 18/2013(Ahd-I) CE/AK/Commr(A)/Ahd, passed by Commissioner of Central Excise-AHMEDABAD-I dated 20/03/2013. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that alleging that the appellant had availed inadmissible credit of Rs. 28,66,666/- a Show Cause notice was issued to them for recovery of the same with proposal for penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rned Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, rejected their Appeal. Hence the present Appeal. 3. The Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that since the department has erroneously adjusted the rebate claim of Rs. 28,68,666/-, though sanctioned on 08-10-2010/25-10-2010 but not paid to them, therefore, on their success in the Appeal against the confirmation of demand of Rs. 28,68,666/- before CE .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Indu Nissan Oxo Chem Industry Ltd.(Supra). Accordingly, appellant is entitled to interest from the date of adjustment of the rebate claim. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the Appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law. Appeal allowed. (Operative part of the Order Pronounced .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X