2017 (5) TMI 32

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The matter is listed in mention list to ascertain whether the appellant has complied to the pre-deposit requirement of law. Both sides are of the proposition that when the original duty demand was Rs. 7,90,448/- and that was agitated before learned Commissioner (Appeals), interest of Revenue was protected by a pre-deposit of Rs. 59,284/-. Accordingly, an amount of Rs. 59,284/- was deposited for c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reof as well as use in manufacture or mere mention of address of appellant on invoices entitles the appellant to the Cenvat credit. 5. Appellant says that upon verification, learned Commissioner was satisfied [para 6 of the order at page 5] that except an amount of Rs. 95,517/- rest of the credit satisfies the condition to make the appellant eligible to Cenvat credit. So also, learned Commissio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in controversy. 9. The appellant was an SSI and it crossed the SSI exemption limit on 03.12.2012. It is also a registered SSI, who made an application to the authority on 26.11.2012. Registration was granted to it on 03.12.2012. Appellant filed the respective return for the period Oct.' 12 to Dec.'12 on 16.01.2013. The controversy arose upon crossing SSI exemption limit by appellant wh....