9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that they were manufactured by the assessee or otherwise in my opinion would cover the issue in favor of the appellant - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/741/2007 - A/30945/2017 - Dated:- 14-6-2017 - Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri Y. Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate for the Appellant Shri M. Chakrapani, Asst. Commissioner/AR for the Respondent ORDER [Order Per: Shri M.V. Ravindran] 1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No.5/2007(C.E)-Commr, dt. 24.07.2017. 2. The relevant facts of the case that arise for consideration are that during the period December 2003 to October 2005, appellant removed duty paid inputs from thei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gaged in the manufacture of bulk drugs. They have two manufacturing units operating under EOU Scheme. During the period of dispute which is from April 2004 to October 2005, some of the inputs were cleared by the DTA unit to the 100% EOU as such without payment of duty on the basis of CT-3 certificate issued by the 100% EOU. Taking a view that the appellant should have reversed the Cenvat credit availed on such inputs cleared without any further processing, proceedings were initiated. While the original adjudicting authority confirmed the demand for reversal of Cenvat credit of ₹ 32,23,689/-, on an appeal filed by the respondent, Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order set aside the demand. Revenue is in appeal against this decisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision in the case of Solectron Centum Electronics Ltd. relates to refund claim. In the case of Solectron Centum Electronics Ltd., the appellant had reversed the credit and filed a refund claim. In fact, in this case also, the appellants have deposited the entire amount and after this decision if it goes in their favour they would be filing refund claim. I do not find difference between the two situations at all. In one case the assessee pays duty and claims refund and in another case he challenges the demand. The above discussion would show that on merits appellants have made out a case and therefore the appeal has to be allowed on this basis itself. Further, I also find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly relied upon the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt has a strong case and the whole demand is not sustainable. I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not at all discussed the issue of limitation, since he allowed the appeal filed by the respondent on merits he considered that, that would be sufficient. The discussion above would show that appeal filed by the Revenue is devoid of merits and deserves to be rejected. 6. It can be seen from the above reproduced portion that an identical issue has been decided by the Tribunal in favour of appellant. It was also stated at Bar that Hon ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh has upheld the said order as reported at (2016(338)ELT 75 (AP). 7. In view of the foregoing, as an identical issue in respect of very same assessee has attained pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
