9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... J) and P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) Shri C. Saravanan, Advocate, for the Appellant, Dr. Nitish Birdi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - One of these appeals is by the assessee and the remaining by the Revenue. The facts are common. Internal auditors of the department, who audited the accounts of the assessee during October-November, 1998, found certain amounts of input-duty credits having been wrongly taken by the party. In a second audit also, which was conducted during the period November, 1999 to October, 2000, similar irregularity was noted. The total amount of Modvat credit found to have been wrongly availed was Rs. 26,58,407/-. These credits were reversed by the part on various dates. To b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ginal authority, The purpose of this ambitious appeal was to get the entire refund claim rejected. This purpose came to be defeated by the appellate authority. To put in a nutshell, there were four appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals)which arose out of the two Orders-in-Original, and these were disposed of in favour of the assessee. Orders-in-Appeal Nos. 54 55/2002 dated 28-2-2002 and Orders-in-Appeal Nos. 57 58/2002 dated 1-3-2002 are the appellate Commissioner's orders now under challenge in the Revenue's Appeal Nos. E/278t2002 and E/279/2002 respectively, 2. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we think we should dispose of the Revenue's appeals after enjoying the fun arising therefrom, The department issued t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osals mentioned at (a), (b) and (c) above and imposed a penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs on the assessee. The assessee's appeal is directed against the Commissioner's order. 4. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we find that refund of a total amount of duty of Rs. 12,55,743/- stands allowed to the assessee (the appellate Commissioner's orders relating to the assessee's refund claims having been upheld in this order), which amount is part of the total amount of duty demanded by the Commissioner. Therefore, in the first instance, the Commissioner's demand to the extent of Rs. 12,55,743/- shall stand set aside. The balance is an amount of Rs. 14,12,184/-, which includes an amount of Rs. 4,73,627/- reversed by the party in Modvat ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court. Further on merits, we have not found the requisite correlation between the credit of Rs. 14,12,184/- and the inputs said to have been received in the factory and used in, or in relation to, the manufacture of the final products during tie material period. The appellants do not seem to have made out a case against the demand of duty of Rs. 14,12,184/-. Credit of this amount, already reversed by the assessee in the relevant accounts, cannot therefore, be allowed to be recredited or refunded. In the result, demand of duty to the extent of Rs. 14,12,184/- shall stand sustained. 6. We have already found that the above credit of Rs. 14,12,184/- was reversed in the relevant accounts. This happened long before issue of the show-cause not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
