9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as proposed in the show cause notice dated 04th September, 2018. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of different varieties of Biscuits classifiable under Sl. No.19 of the Central Excise Tariff Act,1985. During the EA 2000 audit of the records of the Appellant for the period 2015-16 to 2016-17, the department had sought for various details and issued two spot memos dated 19/04/2018 and 24/04/2018 as audit observations for the said period. The Appellant had replied to said memos and the same came to be closed. However again the Appellant had received email communication from the audit department in June and July 2018 as regards requisition of certain data for the purposes of values o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... blindly confirmed the demand of Cenvat credit without taking into account any of the documents as submitted by the Appellant as also ignoring the report of the Ld. Range Superintendent dated 23th July 2019 wherein it has been clearly mentioned that the Appellant has complied with the procedure of Rule 6 of the CCR, 2004 and has reversed Cenvat credit in excess of the actual requirement of reversal of such Cenvat credit. He further submitted that the demand cannot be sustained on the following grounds: a) For the period 2012-13 and 2013-14, the Appellant has already reversed all Cenvat credit for input services as noted in earlier OIO dated 21/06/2016 and hence the question of reversal on account of trading of goods cannot arise as there w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtment letter dated 09/07/2019 and replied on 18/07/2019; f) That the Range Superintendent had submitted its report to the Asst. Commr, Dankuni Division vide its letter dated 23/07/2019 whereas the captioned OIO was passed on 26/07/2019 without taking into account the report of the Range Superintendent; g) That the Appellant vide an RTI application had seen the said report of the Range Superintendent and it was clear from the said report that no demand can be made as the Appellant had followed all the procedures in compliance with Rule 6 of the CCR, 2004; h) That the order of the Ld. Adjudicating authority is cryptic and has not discussed any of the aspects put forth by the Appellant leading to gross injustice to the Appellant; It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the case should have taken into account the submissions of the Appellant from pre SCN stage and the report dated 23/07/2019 supra. However, it is seen from the OIO that the Ld. Adjudicating authority has not discussed the submissions both of the Appellant as well as that of the Range Superintendent and confirmed the entire demand without any discussion on the submissions made. 7. We find from the records that the Appellant has complied with all the provisions of Rule 6 of the CCR, 2004 and that there is no further reversal required for the period under dispute. We also note the fact that for 2012-13 and 2013-14, the entire Cenvat credit of the Appellant stood reversed and adjudicated vide OIO dated 21/06/2016 which had attained finali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
