9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 259X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t should be refunded. The Adjudicating Officer allowed the application in part and disallowed the application in so far as the credit related to the excise duty with reference to the stock and unfinished products in the custody of the assessee. – CESTAT allowed the refund of cenvat credit in full - Held that- the differential of duty liability being a meager sum of Rs. 50,000/- and that too in res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4-9-2008 12009 (245) E.L.T. 413 (Tri. - Bang.)]. 2. The first adjudicating authority allowed the refund application of the assessee in part to the extent of Rs. 43,414/- by its order dated 23-8-2007. 3. The assessee appealed. The first appellate authority set aside the order of the first adjudicating authority by its order dated 30-1-2008 and ordered full relief on the refund application that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reference to the stock and unfinished products in the custody of the assessee. 7. Appearing on behalf of the appellant, submission of Sri Anoop Kumar is that the appellate authority as well as the Tribunal have erred in ignoring the stock in trade which would have been produced before the cut off date of 1-3-2006. CENVAT credit could be availed on manufactured goods and to that extent the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
