2013 (12) TMI 814

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....R.) JUDGEMENT   This Appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No.21/Kol-VII/2011 dated 07.02.2011 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise,(Appeal-I), Kolkata. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellant are manufacturer of natural silk fabrics falling under Chapter Sub-Heading No.50072090 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant also exported the said m....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....riginal No.29.03.2010. Aggrieved by the said Order, the Appellant had filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had upheld the Order dated 29.03.2010 and rejected the appeal filed by the Appellant. Hence the present Appeal. 3. Ld. CA for the Appellant has submitted that the goods manufactured had been exported from their factory and various input services....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The ld. CA further submitted that they had produced all the documents relating to input services and its use in or in relation to manufacture and/or export of the goods and also cited various case laws in support of their claim that they were eligible to cash refund of the CENVAT Credit. The ld. CA further submitted that on similar circumstances, this Tribunal, vide Order No.A-63-64/KOL/13 dated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anufacture and clearance for export of the manufactured goods. Consequently, they claimed the cash refund of the CENVAT Credit on input service under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No.05/06-CE (NT) dated 14.03.2006. I find that initially the refund was sanctioned to them after reducing from the initial claim on the ground that certain amount was not admissible to th....