AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1534
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., for the Appellant. ORDER The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 24-3-2014 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant and upheld the order-in-original. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of excisable goods falling under Chapter Heading 94 of CETA, 1985. On scrutiny of ER-1 returns by the Audit ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Rs. 16,27,567/- for payment of Central Excise duty for clearance during the said month. This wrong utilization of Cenvat credit was made good by the appellant by paying the duty in cash on 17-8-2010. Thereafter the appellant after realizing that they have paid the duty twice filed a refund claim on 3-5-2012. After due process of law, the original authority vide order-in-original rejected the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are entitled to take recredit of Rs. 16,27,567/- in their Cenvat account. He further submitted that the appellant has also paid the interest for the delayed period and had applied for refund in respect of suo motu credit. He further submitted that in cases involving contravention of Rule 8 of Central Excise Rules taking recredit of the amount in the Cenvat account once the equivalent amount is pa....