2016 (8) TMI 747

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lant had received semi finished fabrics from its sister unit at Jalgaon under cover of invoices in which the duty paid was shown to be 16% basic excise duty but the appellant on its own apportioned it in two parts and 50% was taken as credit under basic excise duty and the remaining 50% was taken as credit under AED (ST) in terms of Notification No. 17/2000-CE dated 01.03.2000.  The adjudicating authority held that the appellant was not allowed to do so as it had to take credit of duty as shown in the invoices and as a consequence, an amount of Rs. 61,77,847/- paid as AED(ST) by overdrawing from the cenvat credit account of AED(ST) as it would have gone into red by an equivalent amount if credit of 50% of duty shown in invoices was not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e considered the submissions of both sides. 5.  We find that the sample invoice placed at page 21 of the appeal papers does indicate the duty payment against basic excise duty @ 16% ad valorem.  However, we also find that the entire duty paid is apportioned equally between BED and AED (ST) as per the stamp put on the said invoice.  The Commissioner has stated that this stamp has been put subsequently.  It is a settled principle of jurisprudence that the one who asserts has to establish, save when the statute expressly casts the burden on the accused which is not the case here.  We do not find any basis in the impugned order to be able to sustain the finding/ observation of the adjudicating authority that the invo....