9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner proceeded on the basis of the worksheet. It is observed that the worksheet had been provided to the appellants and the same is available in the case records. We are not convinced with the argument of the Revenue that the worksheet is available in the case records, which is annexed to the impugned order and, therefore, the demand is justified. In our considered view, it is a fit case, where the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ices during the period 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008. The learned Commissioner confirmed the demand of tax Rs.50,84,289/- along with interest under Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 75 of the Finance Act and imposed penalty under Section 76 of the Act as also imposed penalty of equal amount under Rule 15(4) of the said Rules and read with Section 78 of the Act. 4. The learned couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved at by the learned Commissioner. The learned Commissioner observed that the credit was denied on the ground that they have availed credit on the Debit Notes. It is also observed that the amounts mentioned in the invoices and relied upon documents are not tallying with each other and he has also proceeded on the basis of work sheet claimed to be enclosed to the show-cause notice. 4.1 The learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , where the appellant deserved to be granted adequate opportunity to place its case before the adjudicating authority after going through the work sheet. We hold that the demand of tax except Rs.8,69,567/-, is not sustainable without providing the worksheet to the appellant. Hence the demand of tax of Rs.8,69,567/- on input credit availed on exempted service is upheld. 6. So, we set aside the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
