9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ituation, therefore, there was no requirement to issue show-cause notice to the appellant. It is the case of the revenue itself that they were not required to pay duty, therefore, the excess amount paid by the appellant is merely a deposit not a duty. Hence, the provisions of Section 11A of the Act, is not applicable to the case. In that circumstances, the appellant is not required to pay the e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appellant was paying duty after adjusting their Cenvat Credit and taking self credit of duty paid by them in cash. Later on the appellant surrendered the registration certificate and no due certificate was issued. Thereafter, during the course of audit, it was found that during the period 2005-2006 to 2007-2008, the appellant was entitled to avail Cenvat Credit on certain inputs, which the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t inadvertently they failed to take Cenvat Credit. Therefore, they have paid excess duty. In terms of Notification No.56/2002-CE dated 14/11/2002, whatever duty paid in cash is entitled for refund. Admittedly, the appellant has taken self credit of duty paid in cash and no credit of Cenvat Credit taken by the appellant, in these circumstances, it is revenue neutral situation. Moreover, it is the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Notification No.56/2002-CE dated 14/11/2002, the assessee is required to pay duty after adjusting the Cenvat Credit in cash and whatever duty paid in cash is entitled to self credit/refund to the assessee. The case of the revenue is that as they have not availed the Cenvat Credit and they have paid excess duty against actual duty payable by them. Therefore, the excess credit was taken by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue itself that they were not required to pay duty, therefore, the excess amount paid by the appellant is merely a deposit not a duty. Hence, the provisions of Section 11A of the Act, is not applicable to the case. In that circumstances, the appellant is not required to pay the excess refund claimed by them. 7. In view of the above analysis, we set aside the impugned order. In result, we al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
