2006 (6) TMI 413

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ited by the Preventive staff on 14-12-98 and they directed the appellant to reverse the amount of Rs. 3,48,685/- on an allegation that the Modvat credit taken was illegal. The appellant did so. Subsequently, show cause notices were issued to the appellant demanding amount of ineligible credit which was availed by the appellant. The said show cause notices were contested by the appellants and on an appeal, it was decided in favour of the appellant. On the strength of such order in their favour, the appellant filed a refund claim of Rs. 3,48,685/- with the lower authorities. The lower authorities sanctioned the refund claim of Rs. 2,80,573/- and rejected the claim of Rs. 68,247/- on the ground that these amount was never in dispute with the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the appellant on 14-12-98 was under the instructions of Preventive Officer of the Central Excise Division, who visited the factory premises of the appellant. It is also not disputed that an amount of Rs. 68,247/- is correctly availed as credit, and initially credit was availed by the appellant on the invoices which were correct and illegal. The short point which has been a disputed whether the amount, which has been debited by the appellant on 14-12-98 should be considered as amount of deposit or amount of duty. I find that the amount of Rs. 68,247/- is an amount which the appellant is legitimately entitled as Modvat credit and he has reversed the amount on 14-12-98 on the pursuance of officers, hence it cannot be denied that this credit....