TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 992
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellant against OIA No. 16/2007(AHD-II)CE/Raju/Commr(A) dt. 19/03/2007 under which OIO No. 33/AC/06-D dt. 30/10/06 passed by Assistant Commissioner CEX, Dir-I, Ahmedabad-II, was set aside with respect to limitations and case was remanded to the adjudicating authority to give clear findings on all issues raised by the appellant on the issue of limitation. On merits regarding inadmissibility of cenva....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issue has been decided in their favour and argued that this appeal filed by the appellant should be allowed in view of the order dt. 09/06/2008 passed by this Bench. Further as per written submissions dt. 1/10/2013 appellant filed documents relating to the proceedings up to the date of hearing and requested that this appeal should be treated as withdrawn. 3. Sh. K.J. Kinariwala (A.R.) appearing o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oceedings and imposed penalty. Against the OIO dt. 27/04/2007 appellant filed appeal and Commissioner (Appeal) vide OIA No. 82/2007(Ahd-II) CE/Raju/Commr(A) dt. 19/07/2007 set aside the OIO dt. 27/04/2007 passed by Adjudicating Authority. Revenue agitated the OIA dt. 19/07/2007 passed by the first adjudicating authority by filing appeal with CESTAT Ahmedabad bench and this very bench decided Reven....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... which they could take credit and thereafter respondents transfer the same to the job worker by following the procedure. The second option was to simply take credit on the basis of duty paying documents which the respondents have followed. The first option would not have created any problem since the credit taken would have been strictly as per procedure. I also find that none of the judgments cit....