2004 (2) TMI 428

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....halwadekar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Heard both sides. 2. The issue being of a recurrent nature appeal is admitted in exercise of discretion under the second proviso to Section 35B(1) of the Act. The stay application is allowed and since the appeal involves a short question the same is taken up for final disposal. 3. The facts in brief are that, in terms of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ds to another unit and the next 50% debited on 29-11-2001 consequent to the audit objection. Therefore, the appellants were sanctioned the refund of 50% amount. On department's appeal, however, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the adjudication order holding that there is nothing wrong in such reversal. The appellants are contesting the findings arrived at by the Commissioner (Appeals). 5.&e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was deferred till 1-4-2001. So, when on 6-12-2000, balance 50% credit was taken, the taking of credit of that amount was clearly unauthorised. In that situation, the appellants were required to pay the balance amount of 50% which they did by debiting the amount in RG23 Part II on 29-11-2001. Thus the transaction relating to removal of capital goods from parent factory to the new factory got compl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellants were entitled to take the credit of 50% amount on 1-4-2001. They did not do so because of the fact that such credit was already raised by them on 6-12-2000. Since taking of the credit on 6-12-2000 has been objected to the said credit entry stands cancelled on making debit on 29-11-2001. Consequently, the appellants are entitled to take credit of this amount in the RG23 Part II account. O....