TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (10) TMI 519
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 66/2006(V-II) Central Excise, dated 29-5-2006 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs Appeals Visakhapatnam. 2. The appellants are the manufacturers of different varieties of paper, paperboard etc. which are excisable. They deposited various amounts in terms of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p; 413356 274984 3. The Commissioner Appeals in all the seven appeals disallowed Modvat credit to the tune of Rs. 1,38,372/-, it is also seen that in respect of all these appeals put together the appellants had pre-deposited an amount of Rs. 4,13,356/-. As the Commissioner Appeals disallowed an amount of Rs. 1,38,372/- the appellants had taken suo motu credit of the difference between the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order. The Commissioner Appeals upheld the order of the original authority. 4. Mr. K.N. Murali the learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and Shri K. Sambi Reddy learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue. 5. We heard both sides. On a very careful consideration of the matter we find that the Commissioner Appeals and also the original authority had not appreciate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal allowed the parties appeal, they are entitled for all the benefits, in the present case they are entitled for the entire amount disallowed namely Rs. 1,38,372/-. However, the original authority has refunded only a part of the amount and he had rejected an amount of Rs. 26,502/-. We find that the original authority as well as the appellate authority had held that these amounts have been pre-dep....