9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D.N. Patel, J : 1. This Tax Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order passed by the Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, East Zonal Bench, Kolkata (hereinafter referred as "CESTAT"). By the order dated 19th October, 2011 appeal preferred by the respondent has been allowed and, therefore, respondent has preferred the present appeal. 2. Learned counsel for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Modvat credit. This is the main argument canvassed by the counsel for the appellant. It is also submitted by the counsel for the appellant that this aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the CESTAT and, therefore, the said order dated 19th October, 2011 (signed by both the members on different dates) deserves to be quashed and set aside. 3. Having heard counsel for both the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imported. There is also no allegation made by this appellant that anyone has even attempted to get the refund of countervailing duty upon the goods imported. In the facts of the present case only the respondent who has claimed Modvat credit. Thus, the apprehension on the part of this appellant that double benefit may not go to the parties is uncalled for and unwarranted for the very same goods. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rules, 1944 there is substantial compliance of the said rule. There is no direct reference of the certificate or declaration to be given by the importer of the goods under Rule 57G of the Act, 1944, but, as argued by the counsel for the appellant there is a reference of this type of declaration to be given by the importer in a circular issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Depart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
