9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 663X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stantial benefit of proportionate reversal. However, we find that in the order passed by the lower authority, he has not given any finding as to whether the reversal already made satisfies the test of proportionate reversal in terms of quantum of reversal. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that the matter is to be remanded to the original adjudicating authority to verify whether the amount of Cenvat credit already reversed along with interest satisfies the requirement of proportionate reversal.' It is seen from the impugned order that the Adjudicating Authority has verified all the documents placed before him and has passed very detailed order. He has considered the Cost Account s Certificates and has relied on the decision of Hyd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Duty was demanded @ 5%/6% of the value of the exempted goods. After due process the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand. 2. On appeal, this Tribunal vide Final Order No. A/55751/2016 dated 08/12/2016 remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority. It was directed that the appellant is required to reverse the common Cenvat Credit to the extent that the same pertains to the exempted goods. With this direction, the matter was sent to the Adjudicating Authority for Denovo Adjudication. Vide Order-In-Original No. 19-21/Commr/Bol/18-19 dated 23/08/2018, the Adjudicating Authority has gone through the submissions and documentary evidence placed before him along with the Cost Accountant s Certificate. He confirmed the demand of Rs. 3,32, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... common inputs would sufficient and demand made under 5/6% value of the exempted goods is not legally sustainable. In view of these submissions, she prays that the Revenue s appeal may be dismissed. 5. Heard both sides and perused the documents placed before us. 6. It is seen that the impugned order has been passed by the Adjudicating Authority as per the directions of the this Bench vide Final Order No. A/55751/2016 dated 08/12/2016. In this Order, the Tribunal has held as under:- 5. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Works (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Nagpur - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) which has been followed in many other decisions of the High Court as well as the Tribunal has held that once Cenvat credit is reversed, it is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uirement of proportionate reversal. We also make it clear that there is no justification for demand of the amount equivalent to 10%/5% of the value of electricity wheeled out. The appellant should be given an opportunity to argue their case before the original adjudicating authority who is directed to pass order expeditiously within a period of three months of the date of receipt of this order. 7. It is seen from the impugned order that the Adjudicating Authority has verified all the documents placed before him and has passed very detailed order. He has considered the Cost Account s Certificates (Page No. 32, 33 34 of the OIO) and has relied on the decision of Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Aster Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
