TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question, were cenvat credit availed is verifiable fact, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the original adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication. revenue's appeal is allowed by way of remand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time, when this matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondent. I find that in the earlier occasion also, when this matter was fixed for hearing, nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent. In view of this, in accordance with Rule 21 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, so far as the respondent are concerned, the matter is decided ex parte. 3. Heard Shri S.K. Bhaskar, ld. Departmental Representative, assailed the impugned order by reiterating the grounds of appeal in revenue's appeal and emphasised that it is the respondent who were maintaining the records regarding availment of cenvat credit in respect of capital goods and that when the respondent claims that the goods, in question were not cenvat credit availed, it is they who sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the capital goods in respect of which Cenvat Credit had been availed. The respondents in course of proceedings before the Asst. Commissioner had claimed that the capital goods were not cenvat credit availed goods but the Asstt. Commissioner did not accept this plea and held that the goods were cenvat credit availed. On going through the records, I find that this finding is without any reference to the records. If the cenvat credit had been availed in respect of the capital goods in question, the records in respect of the same would be available while the order-in-original passed by the Asstt. Commissioner does not refer to any such records. Since whether or not the capital goods, in question, were cenvat credit availed is verifiable fact, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|