2014 (2) TMI 915
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pendra Singh, Advocate, for the Appellant. Ms. S. Bector, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The prayer in the application is to dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 33,76,043/- confirmed against the appellant by denying them the benefit of CENVAT credit of additional customs duty paid on the capital goods imported by them under Target Plus Scheme, in terms of Notification....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anted by the appropriate officer for installation of the capital goods. 3. After hearing both the sides we prima facie agree with the ld. Advocate that violation, if at all, is of Notification issued under the Customs Act, relatable to the import of the capital goods. As such, denial of CENVAT credit by the Excise authorities on the said ground is not appropriate. We are informed by the ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Bar that there is benefit of drawback stands availed by them. Similarly, the original authority has also expressed doubt that the appellant has not brought anything on record to establish whether or not the importer has availed the drawback facility. 6. We find that the said allegation is not part of Show Cause Notice and in any case, the original as well as the appellate authority has ....
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
TaxTMI