9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eading 8207 9090 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act (CETA), 1985 and are availing the CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services. During the course of scrutiny of the record by the department, the department found following irregularities: Sl. No. Nature of Audit Objection Contraventions Central Excise Duty/Cenvat Credit Involved 1 Removal of Cenvat availed inputs (as such) to specified research institutions under the claim of exemption under Notification No.10/97-CE dated 1.3.1997 as amended without reversal of an amount equal to Cenvat Credit availed. Rule 3(5) & 4(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 Rs.11,265/- 2 Non-receipt of re-warehousing (RWH) certificate towards clearance of final products un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned consultant for the appellant submitted that for the manufactured goods, the appellants would remit duty of excise and on removal of goods as such also, the appellant discharges duty of excise and avails CENVAT credit on inputs and input services. He further submitted that with regard to the issue of removal of CENVAT credit availed inputs under Notification No.10/1997 without reversal of credit, he submitted that the appellant had provided details to the department during the course of audit. He further submitted that the appellant had already reversed credit @ 8% / 10% of the value of the manufactured goods and now again, the appellant could not be asked to rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e barred. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the appellant has tried to justify the irregularities which has been pointed out by the Revenue but the said justifications have not been properly considered by the Revenue while confirming the demand. Therefore, I am of the view that this case needs to be remanded back to the original authority with a direction to consider the reasons given by the appellant for the discrepancies observed by the Revenue during the course of audit. Therefore, I set aside the impugned order and remand the case back to the original authority to consider the wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
