2014 (12) TMI 496

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....M.S. Nagaraja, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri K.P. Muralidharan, Supdt. AR. ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Das: Both the appeals arising out of a common order and, therefore, both are taken up together for disposal. 2. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 61,81,244/- against their Unit-II and Cenvat credit of Rs. 13,42,860/- against Unit-I along with....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. 61,81,244/- for the period from 01.04.2007 to 31.01.2009 and 01.04.2011 to 30.09.2011. There was excess payment of duty of Rs. 13,42,840/- by Unit-II, during the period 01.02.2009 to 31.03.2011, which was erroneously availed Cenvat credit by Unit-I. Hence, there is a demand of duty of Rs. 61,81,244/- against Unit-II and denial of Cenvat credit of Rs. 13,42,840/- to Unit-I as wrongly availed by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and credit was availed by Unit-I. In our considered view, prima facie, the Cenvat credit cannot be denied to the Unit-I recipient of input. But, we are not impressed with the submission of the learned Counsel that it is a case of revenue neutrality and, therefore, demand is not sustainable. It is a question of fact required to be examined at length at the time of appeal hearing. The submission of ....