TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 234
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er referred to as the Rules of 2004). Departmental audit was carried out by an audit party in which a credit of Rs. 2,92,401/- was disallowed on LDO/furnace oil. Interest of duty amounting to Rs. 43,806/- was also added. The said amount was debited from RG23A. Subsequently, the appellant noticed that under the Rules of 2004 Cenvat credit can be claimed on furnace oil and, accordingly, intimated the Assistant Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise, Ghaziabad vide letter dated 25th April, 2005 that they had wrongly debited the credit of Rs. 2,63,446/- and informed the department that they are taking the relevant credit entry again by reversal of entry under Rule 7 of the Rules of 2004. By the said letter, the appellant not only informed the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l held that the appellant could not recredit the amount suo moto in the Cenvat account and that appropriate orders was required to be passed by the proper authority. The Tribunal was also of the view that the appellant could apply for refund under the Act but could not take suo moto recredit of the duty. The appellant, being aggrieved, has filed the present appeal, which was admitted on the following substantial question of law:- 1. "Whether, the appellant being legally entitled to the claim of Cenvat Credit on furnace oil used as input for the manufacture of "Brake Shoe Castings", there is no application of Rule 14 relating to recovery of Cenvat Credit wrongly taken or erroneously refunded, read with Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....redit was allowed for which there is no dispute. However, for whatever reasons, the appellant reversed these Cenvat credit entries and debited the said amount in its books but subsequently, realised that they were eligible for Cenvat credit, inasmuch as furnace oil was an input as defined under the Rules, based on which, the assessee issued a letter dated 25th April, 2005 indicating its intention to again make the reversal of its Cenvat credit entries and also enclosing the original invoice bills. In this view of the fact, we find that the show cause notice was wrongly issued on a wrong premise that no permission was taken or that original documents were not filed. In fact, we find that the appellant had not only intimated the department a....