9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1311X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hri V.K. Chaturvedi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - After hearing both sides duly represented by Shri S.K. Bagaria, ld. Advocate and Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, ld. SDR, we find that the present appeal has been filed against the order of the Deputy Commissioner quantifying amount of Modvat credit required to be reversed by the appellants. The contention of Shri B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Rs. 24,82,488.00 to be reversed by the appellants out of the credit availed against the common inputs consumed in the manufacture and clearances of exempted/exported footwear. Ld. Advocate submits that they have no grievance with the said quantification of the amount which has been done by the Deputy Commissioner in accordance with the Tribunal's direction and Board's Circular. However, their gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me. The appeal against the above order should have been filed by the appellants before the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. However, we find that the said communication of Deputy Commissioner is not deciding any legal issue but is only quantifying the demand in terms of order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna. In fact in the operative portion of the order passed by the Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date when communication quantifying the demand of duty is received by the assessee. Accordingly, the objection of the ld. SDR is over-ruled. 4. It is however seen that throughout the proceeding, the issue before the authorities concerned including Tribunal was as regards the correct method to be adopted for reversal of the amount of credit initially availed in respect of inputs utilised in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
