2007 (3) TMI 170
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led on the quantities short received by the appellants. (Annexure 'A' to Show Cause Notice). It was submitted that this amount had already been reversed on 26-12-2002. (ii) In respect of amounts mentioned in Annexure 'B' , 'B-1 and 'B-2', it was alleged that full Cenvat credit had been taken in respect of inputs short received as found at the time of stock taking on 31-12-2000, 2001 and 2002 respectively. It was submitted that in respect of Annexure-B, actually there was no short receipt as alleged. In respect of Annexure 'B-1/B-2', it was submitted that during the stock taking, though shortage and excess of inputs were found, the excess balances were not considered. The following case-laws were relied on :- (a) Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he light of Board's Circular No. 643/34/2002-CX., dated 1-7-2002 and the following three decisions : (a) Ispat Metallics Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Raigad - 2006 (194) E.L.T. 417 (Tri.-Mumbai) (b) CCE, Vadodara v. Asia Brown Boveri Ltd. - 2000 (120) E.L.T. 228 (Tribunal-LB) (c) CCE, Coimbatore v. American Auto Service - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 71 (Tribunal) (v) In respect of Annexure 'E', an amount of Rs. 10,20,835/- relates to the credit on rejected inputs lying in stock. According to the department, these inputs are not going to be used in the manufacture and, therefore, the credit is to be reversed. It was contended that in respect of inputs involving credit of Rs. 9,76,623/-, the same have been used in the manufacture. In fact, as per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the case carefully. The demand in respect of the Cenvat credit alleged to have been irregularly availed is as per the 7 Annexures to the Show Cause Notice. According to the Revenue, the irregularity is on account of the following reasons :- (i) In respect of certain cases, the goods shown in the invoice have not been fully received. (ii) The appellants took credit on the short received quantities also. (iii) The appellants had taken credit in respect of inputs which were written off. (iv) When the inputs are cleared as such, duty ought to have been paid on the rate applicable to such goods on the date of removal on the value determined under Section 4. (v) Credit was taken in respect of rejected goods, which are not used ....
TaxTMI