2018 (4) TMI 1084

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ingh, Deputy Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per : Anil Choudhary The issue in this appeal is, whether the appellant a manufacturer of detergent and registered with the Department, have contravened the provisions of Rule 9(1)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as it appeared to Revenue that they have taken wrong Cenvat credit on the strength of supplementary invoice No. 528 dated 16....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the said supplementary invoice, appellant Hi-Tech have taken the Cenvat credit thereof. Accordingly, pursuant to show cause notice vide Order-in-Original dated 31/12/2008. The Cenvat credit of Rs. 1,59,571/- was disallowed and further penalty Rs. 10,000/- was imposed under Rule 15 of CCR, 2004 along with interest. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before Id. Commissioner (Appeals) wh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ured by appellant, the allegation of undervaluation is only with respect of two products. It is also brought out from the facts that M/s. HLL was providing the costing to the appellant based on which the goods were cleared by the appellant. That immediately, after being pointed out by the audit, the appellants have paid the duty along with interest. In such a case, the show cause notice ought not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nbsp; The learned A. R. for Revenue relied on the impugned order. 6.  Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the present proceedings have been initiated by way of sequel to the proceedings initiated at Pondicherry in the case of RK Industries and Hindustan Unilever Ltd. As the proceedings at the end of RK Industries and Hindustan Unilever Ltd. stands settled vide final order ....