9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1018X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2-11-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member S. Raghu Adv, Shri Raghavendra, Adv. - For the Appellant Shri Naveen K, AR - For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 15.02.2017 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has modified the impugned order and restricted the demand to ₹ 85,731/- along with interest and penalty of equal amount. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that during the audit of the records at their Gurgaon plant, it was observed that they had availed input credit on the goods rejected and returned by their customers, indicated as Line Rejections in their Trial Balance; that as such goods were not fit for b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3,742 2010-11 4,96,000 10.30% 51,294 Total 1,37,025 2.2 It also appeared that they had suppressed the fact of availing such CENVAT credits and but for its detection by the Internal Audit Team (Delhi-III Commissionerate), such irregular CENVAT credit availment would have gone un-noticed. Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner, Large Tax Payers Unit, Bangalore, issued them a Show Cause Notice (SCN), proposing to demand the irregularly availed CENVAT Credit of ₹ 1,37,025/-. 3. After following the due process, the Dy. Commissioner confirmed the demand and aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of material on record, I find that the allegation of the appellant is that he has produced sufficient documentary evidence before both the authorities showing the clearance of goods on payment of duty after re-processing. Further, I find that appellants are still ready to produce those invoices which can correlate the receipt and clearance of rejected goods. Since these documents were not considered by the Learned Commissioner (A) by observing that they are not on the paper book of the appeal. In view of this, I find that this case needs to be remanded back to the original authority to pass a de novo order after considering all the evidences which the appellant may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
