9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 726X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER The issues to be decided by me in the present case are as follows: 1. Whether the appellant is entitled for refund of Rs. 81,533/-. 2. Whether the appellant is entitled for an adjustment of cenvat credit of Rs. 1,85,149/-. A SCN was issued which was culminated into adjudication order whereby both the claim were rejected by the original authority on the ground of time bar. The Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustment of cenvat credit of Rs. 1,85,149/-, he submits that there is no time limit for availment of cenvat credit prior to 01.09.2014 and in respect of all the cenvat credit invoices pertaining to period prior to 01.09.2014, therefore, the cenvat credit should have been allowed. 3. Ms. Nitina Nagori Ld. Deputy Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for refund. As regard the adjustment of cenvat credit of Rs. 1,85,149/-, I find that this is cenvat credit which was already accrued to the appellant, before 01.09.2014 there was no time limit for which adjustment was sought for all the invoices were issued prior to 01.09.2014, therefore, cenvat credit on the said invoices cannot be denied on the ground of time bar. Therefore, the demand of Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
