9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (8) TMI 261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner (Appeals) whereby the denial of credit in respect of inputs which were stolen, was set aside. 2. When the case was called none appeared on behalf of the respondent. The notice issued to the respondent was received back undelivered with the postal remarks that assessee is not available at the given address. The notice was issued on the address, which was known, to the Revenue on which the resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Central Excise, Chandigarh, reported in 1994 (73) E.L.T. 397 (Tribunal). 4. The contention of the Revenue is that, as the inputs were not used for the manufacture of final product; therefore, the respondents are not entitled for the credit. The contention is that the fact of the case which is relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) is different from the facts of the present case. In the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (I) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II, reported in 2004 (173) E.L.T. 187 (Tri.-Mumbai) to submit that the inputs which are lost in fire before these were issued for manufacture of final product to manufacturer as to reverse the credit. 5. I find that in this case the Commissioner (Appeals) relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ram Printing Mills v. C.C.E., Chand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
