9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondent ORDER Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant, inter alia is engaged in the manufacture of pesticides. For manufacture of the said final product, CARTAP is used as a raw material, which was imported by the appellant in the month of May 2006 on payment of CVD and SAD. An amount of Rs. 14,87,490/- paid as CVD was t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Excise had confirmed cenvat demand of Rs. 14,87,490/- along with interest and also imposed equal amount of penalty on the appellant. On appeal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Mumbai-I vide the impugned order dated 03.06.2011 has upheld the adjudged demand confirmed on the appellant. Hence, the appellant has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 3. It is an admitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding that since the duty payment on the input has been accepted by the department, proceedings cannot be initiated for recovery of the cenvat amount. 4. In view of above, I do not find any merits in the impugned order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, after setting aside the same, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed. (Dictated and pronounced in the open court) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
