2015 (5) TMI 1124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aring today, none appeared for appellant and Shri M.R. Sharma, learned AR appeared the respondent-Revenue. During the course of hearing of appeal on 16.12.2014, the appellant has filed a written submission and prayed for deciding the appeal on the basis of submissions made therein. 2. According to the appellant, Central Excise Duty attributable to the finished goods has been paid on removal of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se duty paid on the finished goods removed from the factory on earlier occasions. Hence, denial of Cenvat credit by the authorities below is not in confirmity with the statutory provisions. 3. Per-contra, the submissions of the Revenue-respondent are that no goods were received back by the appellant, instead ash and broken pieces packed in bags were received by them which cannot be equated with t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... een made in the said register on the basis of the original invoices, in the cover of which the goods were initially removed from the factory. Hence, it is erroneous to assume that the goods were not identifiable and relatable to the duty paid documents and also it is not proper to conclude that no records have been maintained for return of defective goods. It is not in dispute that the Daily Stock .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X