9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1787X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not required to pay shall amount to reversal of Cenvat credit which sought to deny by way of impugned order. In these circumstances, we hold that the demand confirmed by way of impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, levy of interest and penalties are also not sustainable - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/3989-3990/2003-Mum - Final Order Nos. A/754-755/2014-WZB/C-II(EB) - Dated:- 12-11-2014 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (J) and P.K. Jain, Member (T) Shri A. Hidayutullah, Sr. Advocate with Makrand Joshi, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Rakesh Goyal, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : Ashok Jindal, Member (J)]. - The appellants are in appeals against the impugned order wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, a show-cause notice was issued to the appellants on 25-7-2001 for the period August 1998. The show cause notice was adjudicated and the demands were confirmed against the main appellant along with interest and also imposed penalties on both the appellants. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before us. 3. Heard both sides. 4. Shri A. Hidayutullah, learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that as per Rule 57H of Central Excise Rules, 1944 they are entitled to take transitional credit on the inputs which have gone into manufacture of finished goods and cleared after 3-8-1998 as they have paid excise duty after 3-8-1998. It is also submitted that they have complied with the condition of Rule 57G and 57 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... final products have been cleared from the appellants factory prior to 3-8-1998 to their godown. It is also an admitted fact that these goods have been cleared from their godown on payment of duty which was not required to pay by the appellants. In these circumstances, relying on the decision in the case of Ajinkya Enterprises (supra) we are of the considered view that as duty has been paid by the appellants on clearance of these final products which was not required to pay shall amount to reversal of Cenvat credit which sought to deny by way of impugned order. In these circumstances, we hold that the demand confirmed by way of impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, levy of interest and penalties are also not sustainable. In nutshe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
