9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing recipient of the inputs had taken credit as per invoice issued by the manufacturer – appellant’s contention that the inputs cannot be reassessed to duty at recipient end, is acceptable - impugned order is set aside – assessee’s appeal allowed - E/134/2007-SM(BR) - 515/2008-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 7-3-2008 - Shri S.S. Kang, Vice-President Shri Atul Gupta, C.S., for the Appellant. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present appellant who is recipient of the inputs wrongly taken credit of the duty paid in terms of SI. No. 3 of the table to the notification. 4 . The contention of the appellant is that they are recipient of the input which are dutiable inputs and further used in the excisable goods. The appellant being recipient of the inputs had taken credit as per invoice issued by the manufacturer. The con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the manufacturer. The manufacturer of inputs paid duty under Notification No. 23/2003-CE. Now, the Revenue is" only raising dispute that the supplier of inputs i.e. manufacturer has wrongly paid duty as payable at Sl. No. 3 of the notification whereas the duty actually is to be paid as payable Sl. No. 2 of the notification. It is settled law that the assessment cannot be reopened at recipient en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
