TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ped the demand by relying on the final order of this Tribunal in the case of CNC Commercial Ltd. The said final order was ultimately affirmed by Hon ble Supreme Court. The order passed by the original authority through which proceedings initiated through show cause notice dated 09.06.2009 were withdrawn, is upheld - the impugned order set aside - appeal allowed. - HON BLE MR. ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) Shri Mayur Shroff , Advocate , for the Appellant Shri P. K. Acharya , Superintendent , Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER : ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was availing the benefit of cenvat credit and was paying central excise duty duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Credit Rules, 2004 and dropped the proceedings. Revenue preferred appeal against the said order. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order passed by the original authority. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant is before this Tribunal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel has submitted that the provisions of sub-rule (2) of Rule 11 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 provide that when the appellant opts for full exemption from payment of central excise duty, then on that date the cenvat credit allowed to the appellant in respect of inputs lying in the store and those in the process and contained in the final products lying in the store is to be deducted from the balance of the cenvat credit and if any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merged with the order of Hon ble Supreme Court. He has further submitted that the original authority has dropped the demand by relying on this Tribunal s decision in the case of CNC Commercial Ltd. (supra). Therefore, the order passed by the original authority sustains and any other order contrary to the order passed by the original authority needs to be set aside. 3. Learned AR has supported the impugned order passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) and relied on Annapurna Re- Rolling (P) Ltd. vs. CESTAT, Chennai reported at 2018 (14) GSTL 512 (Mad.) and Albert David Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut reported at 2003 (151) ELT 443 (Tri.-Del.). 4. I have carefully gone through the record of the case and submissions made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
