9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent to the appellant. The same is considered as the sufficient ground to hold the appellant to not to be eligible for the refund. The matter may be remanded back again to the original adjudicating authority to take into consideration the relevant evidence including C.A. Certificate - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Excise Appeal No. 52329 of 2018 [SM] - Final Order No. 50649/2019 - Dated:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... butting the submissions has mentioned that the C.A. Certificate was never produced before the adjudicating authority below, despite that the demand has been confirmed observing the unjust enrichment on the part of the appellant. Appeal is therefore prayed to be dismissed. The ld. D.R. has relied upon the decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Madras vs. Addison Co. Ltd. Reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - vide a Cenvat credit entry No.962 dated 31.12.2003 with the remarks re-credit alleged that the cenvat credit has been availed by the appellant without support of any documents in contravention of rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. Resultantly, a show cause notice No.5549 dated 31.08.2004 was served upon the appellants proposing the recovery of the erroneously availed cenvat credit for the af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing authorities below. The said document may be a relevant piece of evidence, affecting the adjudication of the present matter. However, in the given circumstances the same cannot be considered by this Tribunal. 7. Resultantly, I find that the matter be remanded back again to the original adjudicating authority to take into consideration the relevant evidence including C.A. Certific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
