9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 494X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal and has gone beyond the scope of the show cause notice which is not permissible to him - Hence, do not find any merit in the impugned order, the same is rejected and the appeal is allowed in favour of assessee. - E/602/2009 - A/439/2010-WZB/C-IV/(SMB) - Dated:- 11-8-2010 - Shri Ashok Jindal, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri J.C. Patel, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.M. Vaidya, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The appellant has filed this appeal against the order of denial of Cenvat Credit taken by them on the inputs used by the job worker in the processing of the goods, which were cleared without payment of duty by the job worker. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant was engaged in the manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,69,000/- declaring the same to be relatable to the stocks of cloth and yarn available with them, either as such or in process or contained in finished goods, in stock as on 1-4-2003. 4. The appellant availed credit in respect of entire yarn received during the period from April, 2003 to July, 2004 including transitional credit availed in respect of yarn in stock as on 1-4-2003. It was noticed that the appellant was utilizing the yarn for embroidery, which was cleared on payment of duty as well as embroidery performed as job work on material received from the principle manufacturer under Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and the appellant had never reversed the credit pertaining to yarn used for aforesaid exempted activity. 5. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of final products, which were cleared without payment of duty by the job worker for further utilization in manufacture of final product, which are cleared on payment of duty by principal manufacturer, not hit by provisions of Rule 57C of Central Excise Rules, 1944. 12. He further submits that the appellate authority in the impugned order held that there is a merit in the contention of the applicant but passed the order on some irrelevant observation. 13. In this regard, Shri J.C. Patel, the Ld. Advocate placed reliance on UOI v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd., 1991 (55) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.) wherein the Apex Court directed the department to pay utmost regard to judicial discipline and gi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thorities should be followed unreservedly by the sub ordinate authorities. The mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is not acceptable to the department, in itself an objectionable phrase and is the subject-matter of an appeal can furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent Court. If this healthy rule is not followed, the result will only be undue harassment to assessee and chaos in administration of tax laws. In this case also, when the Commissioner (Appeals) has found force in the argument of the appellant that the decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal, in the case of M/s. Sterlite Industries (Supra) is applicable to this case but he did not pay any respect to the decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
