9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ranjape, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair This Rectification of Mistake application filed by the Revenue on the ground that in the Order-in-Original, Commissioner has recorded following facts: 39. As regards reversal of modvat credit of Rs. 1,39,418/- in respect of receipt of materials sent for job-work under Rule 57F(4) I observe that since the notice No.1 has already volun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has ordered for appropriation of the amount so confirmed and already paid by the notice. 2. Shri. Ajay Kumar, Ld. Joint Commissioner(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the grounds of application. He submits that interest was not confirmed by the adjudicating authority in the order-in-Original which was chargeable in terms of Rule 571(5) of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. 5. We find that as regard non-confirmation of reversed amount of Rs. 1,39,418/- in the operating portion of the impugned order, revenue has made specific ground in para 6.3 of their grounds of appeal of which this tribunal in their final order did not give any findings. On going through the findings of the Commissioner in pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 57F(4) wherein if the input sent for job work is not returned within the 60 days assessee is required to reverse cenvat credit attributed to the input sent for job work. Respondent admittedly reversed the Cenvat credit. This is not the case of wrong availment of credit by reason of fraud, misstatement, suppression of facts etc. Therefore interest provision of Rule 57 I(5) is not applicable, hence, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
