2014 (12) TMI 578

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... akes it absolutely clear that the Customs authorities at Chennai have confirmed payment of duty by the appellant at the time of importation of the capital goods. It is also not in dispute that the appellant had received the capital goods and installed and used the same in the manufacture of dutiable final products. In these circumstances, the appellants is rightly entitled for the credit. Therefor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pital goods imported by them vide Bill of Entry No. 3651 dated 23/01/1996. Aggrieved of the same, the Revenue is before us. 3. The only ground urged in the appeal memorandum is that the appellant did not furnish the duplicate copy of the Bill of Entry duly certified by the Customs with regard to payment of duty, but took credit on the basis of reconstituted bill of entry and the said reconstitu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of duty by the respondent and also indicated that on the reconstituted copy of the Bill of Entry, the same will not bear pin point typing of the duty amount. However, payment of duty has been verified with the original copy of the Bill of Entry No. 3651 dated 23/01/1996 and the duty liability has been discharged. Since the duty liability has been discharged and confirmed by the Customs authoriti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X