2017 (7) TMI 930

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the present case are that appellants are engaged in the manufacture of alternators falling under various chapter headings of CETA, 1985. During the audit on the records of the appellant by the internal audit party of LTU, Bangalore, it was observed that they have availed credit of Rs. 4,32,322/- during the month of 05/2007 without a document evidencing payment of duty. On enquiry, it was stated that they had reversed an amount of Rs. 4,32,322/- towards differential duty payable by them as pointed out by the audit party on 13.10.06. Subsequently, during 11/06 to 02/07 the appellants raised supplementary invoices for the said amount in order to recover the amount from the customers. While computing the duty amount during the months of 11/0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... value of the supplementary invoices in the value of clearances but due to clerical mistake the same was also included and the amount was paid and the said mistake was noticed during May 2007 and self-assessment was made in May 2007 returns in terms of Rule 12BB applicable for LTU. He further submitted that Revenue is wrongly alleging that the appellant has taken suo moto credit whereas this amount was paid again during November 2006 to February 2007 and the impugned order has wrongly presumed that the appellant has taken suo moto credit. He further submitted that what was claimed as adjustment was not the amount paid and collected from the customers but instead it is the amount wrongly paid due to clerical error while computing the duty li....