TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (10) TMI 646
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dent ORDER Per : Shri M. V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) This appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal No.SVS/236/NGP-B/2006 dt. 8.8.2006. 2.Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. The issue involved in this case is regarding the denial of modvat credit to the appellant on the ground that they have availed cenvat credit on the basis of the invoices supplie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cise, New Delhi as reported at [2003 (153) E.L.T. 114 (Tri.Del.)]. The ratio of the decision of R.S. Industries is as under:- "We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The Revenue has not challenged the findings contained in the impugned order to the effect that the allegation of non-receipt of goods by the Appellants has not been established beyond doubt in view of the fact that Pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., omission or misconstruction on the paret of officer or manufacturer or an assessee. As far as the appellants are concerned there was neither any error nor any misconstruction on their part. We also do not find any substance in the submission of the learned SDR that larger period of limitation will be invokable irrespective of the fact that fraud has not been committed by the appellants. It is ev....