9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... department could not get the duty twice. - CEA No. 12 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 23-5-2011 - Adarsh Kumar Goel and Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate for the Appellant Susheel Gautam, Advocate for Gurpreet Singh for the Respondent JUDGEMENT Adarsh Kumar Goel:- 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n excess of duty due and the benefit could be admissible only to the extent of duty due. The order of Adjudicating Authority has been affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as by the Tribunal. The Tribunal observed as under:- "4. The law on the point that the manufacturer can avail the Modvat Credit only to the extent of the duty paid on the inputs purchased is well settled. In the absen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and is accordingly, dismissed." 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that even if the duty has been paid in excess of the amount finally held to be payable, unless the excess duty paid has been refunded, the assessee could claim cenvat credit as the department could not get the duty twice. Reliance has been placed on order of this Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
