TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 818X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification No. 01/2011 without adverting to the statutory provision of Sub - Rule (3D) of Rule 6 which was strongly contended by the appellant. No analysis of such defense has been made by the Original Authority - Original Authority fell in error in not considering the legal provisions as contended by the appellant. Impugned order not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leging that the appellant did not fulfill this condition proceedings were initiated against them to demand and recover differential duty on such product denying the concession under the said notification. 2. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that they did avail concessional under Notification No. 01/2011 for the period March, 2011 to March, 2013. During the month of March, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on wherever available on such non - availment shall be eligible to the appellant. On limitation also the Ld. Counsel submitted that they have been intimating the department on their action regularly and there could be no allegation justifying extended period. 3. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. The only dispute in the present case is with reference to entitlement of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e note that Sub - Rule (3D) of Rule 6 stipulates as under: - (3D) Payment of an amount under sub - rule (3) shall be deemed to be CENVAT credit not taken for the purpose of an exemption notification wherein any exemption is granted on the condition that no CENVAT credit of inputs and input services shall be taken. 4. The fact s as asserted by the appellant are covered by the above provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
