2017 (6) TMI 198

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erefore all the four appeals are being disposed of by the present order. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture and export of Sheet Metal Enclosures and parts thereof. The appellants are holders of Private Bonded Warehouse License and In-Bond Manufacture Sanction Order both bearing No 32/2005 dated 21.02.2005 under the provisions of Sections 58 & 65 of the Customs Act 1962. The appellants filed four different refund claims covering period from February 2009 to May 2009; June 2009 to September 2009, April 2010 and May 2010 with the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 read with Notification 5/2006- CE(NT) dat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd the Original authority after satisfying himself that the inputs in respect of which CENVAT credit has been availed has been used in the manufacture of final product, sanctioned the refund claim in terms of Rule 5 of CCR. He further submitted that in the present case there is no dispute about the fact of the appellants having received inputs in their factory on the strength of which CENVAT credit of duty paid had been availed in terms of Rule 3 of CCR. There is also no dispute about the appellants having paid the supplier of inputs full amounts inclusive of duty element on which CENVAT credit has been availed by them and further there is no dispute about the inputs having been used in the appellant's EOU and for manufacture of final produ....