2016 (11) TMI 1168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or Respondent (s) :  Shri Nitin N. Mehta, Consultant ORDER  This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against OIA No. AKP/226/DMN/NDMN/2009-2010 dated 23.12.2009 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Daman. 2.    Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Respondent had availed CENVAT credit of Rs. 11,87,072/-on the capital....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... impugned order and allowed their appeal.  Hence, the Revenue is an appeal.  3.    Ld. AR for Revenue reiterating  the grounds of appeal submits that the Respondent are required to reverse the credit, availed at the time of receipt of the capital goods, on its clearance from factory  in view of Rule 3(5) of CCR 2004 and not on the transaction value of the said....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the scrap value and not cleared "as such", therefore, the clearance by them on the transaction value is appropriate.  He submits that even otherwise the demand issued in the year 2008 for recovery of CENVAT credit on clearance of the capital goods in 2006, is barred by limitation.  5.    Heard both sides and perused the records.  The short point needs to be address....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....manded to the adjudicating authority to re-determine the quantum of credit required to reversed in the light of Board's Circular and aforesaid judgements.   The aspect of limitation though considered by adjudicating authority but not addressed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order.  On a query from the bench about the claim of the respondent that whether they have ....