9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Jagan Babu, AC (AR) for the Appellant None for the Respondent ORDER Per Madhu Mohan Damodhar : The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of garments. They filed a refund claim on 12.10.2009 under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 to the tune of Rs. 44,30,060/- of the accumulated CENVAT Credit on input services lying in their books of accounts due to export of goods under bond for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner (Appeals) set aside the order of the Original Authority and allowed the appeal in totality. Aggrieved, the Department is in appeal before this forum. 3.1 Today when the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of the Revenue, Ld. AR Shri. M. Jagan Babu reiterated the grounds of appeal. He further points out that but for provision of Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals). All the issues flagged by the Original Authority while rejecting the refund have been thoroughly analyzed by the lower appellate authority in paragraphs 6 to 9. 6. On the matter of adjustment of the refund with another demand made against the appellant, the lower appellate authority has correctly concluded that such adjustment is not possible, as per the analysis given in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the adjusting of the demand from the Cenvat account of the appellants is not correct." 7. Further, even though the grounds of appeal have indeed mentioned that an appeal has been filed against the said CESTAT Final Order, there is nothing forthcoming on record that the said Order has been stayed or otherwise the Department Appeal allowed. 8. In the circumstances, no merit is found in the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
