9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 946X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... team Air Heater, Laboratory Mixing Oil, Internal Design drive etc. under erstwhile Rule 57Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. A SCN dated 1-9-1995 was issued to the appellants proposing to deny the credit on the ground that the said items were not capital goods. The appellants debited an amount of Rs. 27,783/- vide RG23A Part-II on 17-5-1996 and an amount of Rs. 1,58,318/- on 31-1-1997 vide RG23A Part-II under protest. The entire demand raised vide the aforesaid SCN dated 1-9-1995 was confirmed vide Order No. BLS/125/1996, dated 23-8-1996. The appellants filed an appeal with the Commr. (Appeals), Surat who vide order No. SSS/S.R.T./1639-1648/99, dated 22-9-1999 partially allowed the appeal except for the credit on iron and steel scrap. The dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C.)] and Sahkari Udyog Mandal Ltd. & Ors. [2005 (181) E.L.T. 328 (S.C.)] and the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. BDH Industries Ltd. [2008 (229) E.L.T. 364 (T-LB)]. Relying on these decisions, lower authorities have held that assessee has failed to show that duty burden has not been passed on. I find that we are not really concerned with a refund claim of duty which was paid earlier, but claimed as refund subsequently in this case. Appellant had taken credit on capital goods and on objection raised by the Revenue, as a law abiding citizen, appellant reversed it without waiting for adjudication process, but challenged the same and ultimately succeeded at Tribunal level. In this case, therefore, if appellants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en held that appellants had not been able to show proof of reversal. However, the show-cause notice issued originally itself has admitted the fact that the appellants had reversed the credit. Having accepted that the appellants had reversed the credit while issuing show-cause notice and continuing the process of objection regarding reversal of Cenvat credit on capital goods, Revenue cannot take a stand after twelve years that appellants should produce documentary evidence for reversal of credit. Therefore this ground also cannot be sustained. 7. The above discussion would show that all the grounds taken by lower authority for rejecting refund claim are not valid. Accordingly appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, to the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
