9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s entitled to take the credit of service tax so paid by it and it is not understood as to why the said cenvat credit so availed was held inadmissible to the assessee and whey the assessee was directed to reverse the same. As regards, unjust enrichment, it is the fact that the documents placed before the original adjudicating authority were not considered and scrutinized by him. The appellant has a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs. Archana Wadhwa : The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of MS ingots, MS CTD/TMT bars of Chapter 72 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 filed a refund claim amounting to ₹ 38,55,348/- on account of excess payment of service tax made by them on inward freight during the period from March, 2008 to August, 2008. On perusal of the refund claim, it was observed tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... product like cost of input. Therefore, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant. After considering the submissions made by the appellant, the adjudicating authority has sanctioned the refund claim and ordered the same to be credited to Consumer Welfare Fund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In appeal, the said order was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. After hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ust enrichment are required to be examined by the original adjudicating authority, for which purpose, I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter for doing the needful. The appellant s claim of availability of cenvat credit of the excess service tax paid by them would also be reconsidered. 5. Appeal is thus allowed by way of remand. (Pronounced in the Open Court on 22.11.2016) - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
