2019 (2) TMI 666

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dt. 17/11/2017 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods i.e. CI raw castings and CI machined components and are availing CEN .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without considering the facts and evidences. He further submitted that during the course of audit, when the audit party pointed out towards the availment of CENVAT credit, the appellant immediately reversed the CENVAT credit on 31/03/2014 and the said reversal was declared in the ER-1 return for the month of March 20 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nsel further submitted that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Bill Forge Ltd. [2012(279) ELT 209] wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held that assessee is not liable to pay interest if the assessee has reversed CENVAT credit before utilization of the same. Further the issue of the appellant is covered by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X