2015 (1) TMI 756

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... questions of law for consideration of this Court :- (i)      Whether in facts and circumstances of present case impugned order passed by Hon'ble CESTAT, dated 1-7-2011 is erroneous, unjust, incorrect and unsustainable in law and fact? (ii)    Whether in facts and circumstances of present case the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct to hold that adjustment of Cenvat Credit of the bought-out items supplied with the 'CJK' is wrong, especially when the law laid down has specifically stated that credit is available? (iii)   Whether in facts and circumstances of present case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct to hold that adjustment of Cenvat Credit of the bought-out items supplied w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ril 2003 to October 2003 alongwith interest and penalty was proposed. The appellant filed a reply to the said notice. After considering the matter, the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise vide order, dated 27-1-2005, Annexure A-5 issued a direction for denial of Cenvat Credit of Rs. 20,50,911/- on the bought out items under Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 (in short, "the Rules") read with Section 11A of the Act and recovery of interest under Section 11AB of the Act and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the said order. Vide order, dated 21-11-2005, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the disallowance of the Cenvat Credit of Rs.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....credit in respect of the amount of bought out items supplied with the CJK on which excise duty had been paid. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we do not find any merit in the appeal. The Tribunal while adjudicating the issue against the appellant came to the conclusion that there was no excise duty payable on CJK and as such, the assessee had claimed, wrong Cenvat Credit in respect thereof. The Tribunal further noticed that the present case related to recovery of wrongly utilised Cenvat Credit amounting to Rs. 20,50,911/- on the bought out items for payment of duty on CJK and it was not a case of demand of excise duty. No illegality or perversity could be shown by the learned counsel for the appellant in the approac....