2017 (12) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... plier. Revenue sought to deny the Cenvat Credit in respect of value attributable to such debit note. The said demands of reversal of Cenvat Credit was confirmed along with interest. Penalty under Section 11AC and Rule 15 (2) of Cenvat Credit Rules was also imposed. 2.1 Ld. Counsel argued that debit note was issued inclusive of duty and the supplier has not claimed any refund of the duty paid by him. In these circumstances there was no reassessment from the suppliers end and therefore, the entire amount of duty levied on the goods received by them should be available as credit. He argued that both order-in-appeal as well as order-in-original are not speaking order and that violation of principles of natural justice. It was argued that case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ve gone through the rival submissions. I find that the appellants have primarily relied on the decision in the case of Bhuwalka Steel Industries (Supra). In the said case, while there was a variation in the quantity received there was no revision or issue of debit note and thus, the facts of the said case are different. In the said case, the appellants had not recovered the value in respect of quantity short received from their suppliers, which could have enabled the suppliers to claim refund. In the instant case they gave a reason to their suppliers to revise the value and claim refund, though the appellants claim that the same was not done. The appellants have placed reliance on the various case laws like in the case of Jalan Dyeing & Ble .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... legally correct. We find even the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the appellant did not submit proof that the suppliers did not take any refund. It was further recorded that even the enquiries made with the Jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities could not get proper response. Hence, the lower Authority proceeded to confirm the demand. We find that such confirmation is devoid of legal merit. When the payment of duty by the appellants has not been disputed and the Department entertained a view that there could be some possible refunds at the supplier's side, it is for the Department to verify the facts of the case at the supplier's end. It is not for the appellant to establish sanction or otherwise of any refund to the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X