2015 (2) TMI 39

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....judicating authority has confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 2,18,52,450/-; Rs. 4,68,58,258/- and Rs. 2,36,09,522/- along with interest thereon and also imposed equivalent amounts of penalties on the appellant, M/s. Indoworth India Ltd., Nagpur. The learned adjudicating authority observed that the appellant is not eligible for the benefit of Notification 30/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004 on the goods manufactured by them inasmuch as they have not satisfied the condition of non-availment of CENVAT Credit of the duty paid on inputs or capital goods. Aggrieved of the same the appellant is before us. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant points out that this is the second round of litigation and the matter had earlier come up before this Tribunal in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to, the appellant, vide letter dated 16/01/2012 submitted the stock register of the finished goods as on 14/05/2008, photocopy of the invoices under which the goods were exported, statement showing details of goods exported and statement showing the details of account debited towards quantity found short exported. In the said letter the appellant also intimated the department that they had short exported a quantity of 745.80 kgs. and they have debited an amount of Rs. 39,937/-; Rs. 799/- and Rs. 399/- towards basic excise duty, education cess and higher education cess respectively towards the same. In spite of the documents submitted for verification, this has not been considered by the adjudicating authority while passing the impugned orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty is right in confirming the impugned demand. 5. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. In the remand order dated 11/10/2011, we had clearly directed the adjudicating authority to consider the claim of the appellant that the inputs on which duty credit had been taken were used in the manufacture of goods which were lying in stock on 15/08/2008 and which were subsequently exported. In pursuance thereof the department had also sought the details of the exports made by the appellant as also the stock lying as on 15/08/2008 and the appellant had submitted all the relevant details vide letter dated 16/01/2012. It was therefore, imperative on the part of the adjudicating authority to examine these details and give a specif....