9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 542X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tic converters is concerned Adjudicating authority has clearly brought out that the type of converter, where quantity was excess, had different marks & numbers than the type of converters where shortage was found. This aspect has been clearly brought out by the first appellate authority also. In the field of taking Cenvat Credit the onus is on the appellant to establish that excess quantity of the static converters was the same type where shortage was found. The stock taking was jointly done in the presence of Authorized representation & Sh. D.K. Dugar Prop. of the appellant on 23/3/2001, as is evident from the brief facts of demand cum- show cause notice dt 29/12/2008. Appellant now can not turn around and say that stock taking was defecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of excess quantity of static converters found in appellants accounts / factory. Learned consultant also furnished photocopy of two Bills of entry RG-23 (Port-I), stock register. 3. Sh. A. Roy Supdt (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue made the bench go through Para-14 of the OIO No. 69/Denovo/DD-II/08-09 dt 23/3/09 to argue that LG make static converters are imported model wise. That the excess quantity of static converters was of different models than those static converters where shortage was found. That first appellate authority has given a specific finding on this aspect holding that for excess quantity appellant can take Cenvat Credit. It was his case that once models / numbers of static converters are different then no adjust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lid ground that the demand has been issued after a time-gap 4.1 No appeal was filed by the appellant against the said observation made by this bench while remanding the case. Appellant has thus no locus stand now to agitate the issue of time bar nature of demand. Appellant argument on that accent stands answered in the earlier proceedings and has not been agitated by the appellant. 5. On the issue of not adding 15% to the input value making adjustment of the excess quantity of LG static converter found during stock taking following remand directions were given by this bench in Para-5 of the order dt 11/12/08.:- 5. After hearing both sides, I am of the view that the request for adjustment is reasonable and that can be examined ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OIA dt 7/6/11. In the field of taking Cenvat Credit the onus is on the appellant to establish that excess quantity of the static converters was the same type where shortage was found. The stock taking was jointly done in the presence of Authorized representation Sh. D.K. Dugar Prop. of the appellant on 23/3/2001, as is evident from the brief facts of demand cum- show cause notice dt 29/12/2008. Appellant now can not turn around and say that stock taking was defective or deficient. 5.3 On the issue of stock taking made following observations have been made by CESTAT Delhi in Para-5 of the case law Sikka Papers Ltd. Vs. CCE Meerut-I [2008 (229) ELT 619 (Tri. Del.).] relied upon by the Learned AR.:- 5. After considering the rival sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
