9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - the Commissioner (Appeals) has also traveled beyond the SCN and has raised completely new ground for denying the credit which is not permissible under law. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/21557/2017-SM - Final Order No. 20026 / 2018 - Dated:- 8-1-2018 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Shri Syed Peeran, Advocate For the Appellant Shri Pakshirajan, Assistant Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per : S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 16.08.2017 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has partly allowed the appeal of the appellant. The brief facts of the present case are that the appellant are the manufacturers o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of ₹ 3,30,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Thirty Thousand only) on the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who partly allowed the appeal by allowing the assessee to carry forward the unutilized cenvat credit of ₹ 1,49,054/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Nine Thousand and Fifty Four only) as credit even after conversion into DTAU but denied him to take the credit of ₹ 11,54,122/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Fifty Four Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Two only) on the ground that the credit of duty paid on debonded goods was availed after a period of 6 months from the date of payment of duty and the date of bill of entry and the same is ineligible in terms of Notification 21/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not entitled to carry forward the unutilized credit lying in the Books of Accounts of the EOU upon debonding into DTA. He further submitted that the appellant is not eligible to avail credit of duty paid on the unutilized raw-materials and capital goods lying with the EOU. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record and the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Tecumseh Products India P. Ltd. Vs. CC, CE ST, Hyderabad-IV reported in 2016 (336) E.L.T. 685 (Tri.-Bang.), I find that by the impugned order the credit has been denied by invoking the Notification 21/2014 dated 11.07.2014 which was issued to amend Rule 4(1) and 4(7) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which prescribes the Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
