2005 (11) TMI 18

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....artment on 30.4.2003. the claim was of the duty paid on wires drawn from Wire rods and was based on a judgment of the apex court that drawing of wire from wire rod would not amount to manufacture the original authority by Order- in -Original No.120/2003 dt. 31.12.2003 sanctioned cash refund of Rs.79,303/-and in respect of the balance amount of Rs. 1,52,989/- allowed the claimant to take Cenvat c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... refund of the amount paid  by way of debit in Modvat account. Ld. SDR has reiterated this contention. No. representation for the respondents despite notice, nor any request of their's for adjournment. 2. After examining the records and considering the submissions of SDR, I am inclined to accept the above contention of the appellant. It is not in dispute that the respondents had manufactured....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is allowed. 3. Against Order-in-Original No. 120/2003 ibid, the department had also filed an appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals) challenging the order of the original authority allowing Cenvat credit of Rs.1, 15,989/ to the assessee. This appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as per Order-in-Appeal No. 52/2004 dt. 30.8.2004 in view of the earlier OIA No. 23/2004 dt. 26.3.2004. Now....