TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 1125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent is liable to pay duty on the 100% input removed as such to their sister concern - Held that: - whatever credit they have availed the same was paid at the time of removal of input as such. Therefore, the demand of duty on 0.4% is not tenable for the simple reason that the credit on the said quantity was also not availed at the time of receipt of input - appeal dismissed - decided agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emand of ₹ 12,19,903/- was raised in the show-cause notice. The respondent even before issuance of the show-cause notice found some error in the calculation and suo motu calculated the demand of ₹ 5,50,962/- and the same was paid along with interest. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand vide Order-in-Original no.JC/86/05-06 dated 19.12.2005. Being aggrieved by the Order-in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... give a cogent reason about the demand of ₹ 12,19,903/-. However, the demand was raised on the ground that the respondent have not paid duty on the 100% input removed as such whereas they have paid the duty short on 0.4% quantity of input as against the total quantity of input cleared and shown on the invoice. He submits that at the time of receipt of input, the appellants have admittedly tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause notice and consequently no penalty should have been imposed by the adjudicating authority. He submits that considering all these facts the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) correctly allowed the appeal of the appellants, which does not require any interference. 4. I have carefully considered the submission made by both sides. I find that the issue involved is that the appellants at the time of r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the part of the respondent which they have corrected by paying ₹ 5,50,962/- suo motu along with interest, before issuance of show-cause notice. Considering the above factual position, the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the appeal of the respondent wherein I do not find any mistake. I therefore, uphold the Order-in-Appeal and dismiss the revenue's appeal. CO also disposed of. (P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
