2012 (12) TMI 462

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....enu Jagdev, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : D.N. Panda, Member (J)]. - Shri Narasimhan, learned Counsel says that the goods received by the appellant is the same which were imported and sold by M/s. Doshion Limited. There is no dispute about the goods which came to the factory of the appellant to be different goods from the goods which were sold by M/s. Doshion Limited. Revenue has disa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. 2. Heard both sides and perused record. 3. The matter in controversy touches both facts and law and since balance of convenience is tilting in favour of the appellant stay application is allowed. 4. In view of the elaborate arguments made by the appellant it is considered proper to dispose the appeal itself. Accordingly, appeal is also disposed by this common order. 5....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se notice issuing authority remained un-discarded. When the goods are also subject matter to enjoy Cenvat credit and the substratum of the goods were not impeached by any evidence, the procedure envisaged by Revenue under Rule 11(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 became barrier to grant credit to the appellant. Section 11(2) deals with domestic goods manufactured in India to undergo certain procedu....