2015 (10) TMI 129

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n No. 214/1986 dtd 25.3.1986. The appellant wrongly reversed cenvat credit an amount of Rs. 11,36,541/- on the furnace oil used in the job work material. Thereafter, the appellant vide letter dtd 30.4.2007 requested to the Department for permission to re-credit the said amount. A Show Cause Notice dtd 3.7.2007 was issued to show case as to why the permission for suo moto re-credit would not be rejected. It is alleged that the appellant has debited the amount of Cenvat Credit availed on fuel used for the purpose of job work. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the appellants request for allowing of Rs. 11,36,541/- to re-credit in Cenvat account. By the impugned order, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld adjudication order. 2. The Learned Advoca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e issue is in favour of the Revenue as per order of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal, in the case of BDH Industries Ltd vs CCE - 2008(229) ELT.364(Tri.LB). 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, I find from the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that furnace oil used in the manufacture of final product cleared on job work material under exemption Notification No 214/86-CE. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the appellant cannot take the cenvat credit of inputs, which has been used in the manufacture of goods cleared under the exemption notification. I find that the appellants" own case as reported in 2009(247)ELT.640 (Tri. Ahd) on the identical facts allowed the appeal on identical issue, ....