TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 464X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arnish, but since none of them have been denied to be used by the appellant in the manufacturing process, the findings in impugned Final Order equally applies to those goods also. There is no error apparent on the face of the Final Order. Accordingly, we reiterate that the impugned Final Order hold appellant entitled for availing entire amount of Cenvat Credit as was denied on the ground of ineligible inputs/capital goods. Necessary rectification of para 16 18 of the Final Order as prayed to be rectified to be incorporated in the Final Order - application for ROM allowed in part. - EXCISE RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPLICATION NO.50159-50160 OF 2020 in EXCISE APPEAL No. 1288 OF 2006 and EXCISE APPEAL No. 1352 OF 2006 - MISCELLANEOUS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned that all the items as mentioned in Order in Appeals have not been discussed. Hence the setting aside of entire demand on the ground of ineligible inputs/capital goods is an error. Both alleged omissions/ acts are mentioned to be the error apparent on face of record of the impugned Final Order. Accordingly, the Final Order No. A/51368-51370/2019 dated 22.10.2019 is prayed to be recalled and both the Applications are prayed to be allowed. 3. While rebutting these submissions, ld. Counsel for the appellant has mentioned that several Show Cause Notices were being adjudicated vide two Order in Originals as follows:- 1 Order in-Original No. 01-05-COMMR (ADJ)/RPR/2005 dated 21.12.2005 (with respect to 5 Show Cause Notices) in appeal No.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand of Rs.2,87,30,139/- on the same ground. All these Show Cause Notices were decided vide two separate Order in Originals as mentioned above. 7. Both these Orders-in-Original had confirmed the proposal and denied the availment of Cenvat Credit on two counts :- (1) On the ground of ineligibility of inputs. (2) On the ground of inadmissible documents. Both these Orders in Original have been decided by this Tribunal. Final Order to A/51368-51370/2019 dated 22.10.2019. 8. We observe from the record that both of the above mentioned Order-in-Originals along with others were passed pursuant to the directions of remand vide Final Order of this Tribunal bearing No.731-733/2002 dated 23.08.2005. 9. Para 12 of the impugned final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... findings in impugned Final Order equally applies to those goods also. 11. We observe that the order for all these items to be the capital goods was never challenged by the Department. Accordingly, we hold that all these goods stands duly covered under the discussion in the impugned Final Order. Thus, we hold that there is no error apparent on the face of the Final Order. Accordingly, we reiterate that the impugned Final Order hold appellant entitled for availing entire amount of Cenvat Credit as was denied on the ground of ineligible inputs/capital goods. 12. Coming to the Cenvat Credit which was disallowed on account of inadmissible documents, we observe that an amount of Rs.9,79,334/- was disallowed in appeal No.1288/ 2006 and an a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion about those documents (the orders in original being silent about discussing the documents). We hold that Cenvat Credit of Rs.4,30,31,499/- in Appeal No.2756/2006, Cenvat Credit of Rs.9,79,334/- in Appeal No.1288/2006 and Cenvat Credit of Rs.47,71,648/- in Appeal No.1352/2006 is to be re-adjudicated after proper verification and discussion of the documents by the original adjudicating authority. The matter, accordingly, stands remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority with such directions as mentioned in para 17 of the impugned order. Para 17 of the impugned Final Order also, as far as the amount mentioned therein is concerned, same also stands rectified, to the same effect as mentioned above to be substituted in para 16 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
