2010 (6) TMI 400

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al, Manager (Commercial), for the Appellant. ShriI. Baig, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order (Oral)]. - These two appeals arise out of common order in appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) No. 477-478/KKG/PCK/2007 dated 20-11-07. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The appellants is a manufacturer of capital machinery such as vessels, boilers and they are availing Cenvat credit of in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Central Excise Act. The original authority also imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- in each case. The total disputed credit involved was Rs. 68,015/- in one case and Rs. 58,752/- in another case. Commissioner upheld the order of the original authority in both the cases. 4. Learned Authorised Representative submits that out of a large number of consignments of inputs sent to the job workers,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Learned SDR submits that though the appellants have taken the credit correctly and they have removed the inputs for job workers as per Rule, they failed to bring back the processed goods within the stipulated period of 180 days, and they ought to have immediately after expiry of 180 days reversed the credit and retaining of the credit was not legal and therefore, they were required to pay ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ically before the original authority and before the Commissioner (Appeals) as well. Therefore, for factual verification as to whether there was sufficient credit in the accounts of the appellants so as to refrain from ordering recovery of interest, the matter requires to be sent back. 7. In the present case, the credit taken by the appellants cannot held to be taken wrongly. No doubt that....