9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 542X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) - For the Respondent ORDER These two appeals have been filed by the appellant against the impugned order dated 31.10.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeals of the appellant. As the issue involved in both the appeals is common, therefore, both the appeals are disposed of by this common order. 2. Heard both the parties and perused t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice that the goods have not been received and utilized. But the original authority in para 12 of the order concludes that the inputs have not been received as the appellant was not able to produce the document on the basis of which the credit was availed. In support of this submission, he relied upon the decision in the case of Philips India Ltd. Vs. CC, 2005 (191) E.L.T. 1028 (Tri.-Mumbai). He f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CE, Indore 2001 (147) E.L.T. 333 (Tri.-Del). He also submitted that credit cannot be denied on technical ground which was done by both the authorities below and in support of this, he relied upon the decision in the case of Vimal Enterprises - 2006 (195) E.L.T 267 (Gujarat High Court). He also submitted that the extended period of limitation has been wrongly invoked as the appellant has been filin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion original copies of the invoice and the Bill of Entry and in certain cases he has got the photocopy of the Bill of Entry which can be verified by the Customs. Further I also find that the authorities below have denied the cenvat credit on highly technical ground whereas in the cases cited supra, it has been held that the credit can be availed on the basis of photocopy of the courier Bill of En ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
