2018 (5) 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

....o the appellant and they were not provider of output service as required under the Cenvat Credit Rules. The matter was adjudicated and the entire demand was confirmed along with interest and penalty of equivalent amount was imposed under section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 . In appeal, the appeal of the appellant was rejected by the Commissioner  (Appeals). Aggrieved from the same, the appellant have filed this appeal. 2. The representative of the company submits that the adjudicating authority and the first appellate authority have failed to take into account the breakdown of service tax which they have submitted to the adjudicating authority vide their reply to the show cause notice dated 11.5.2012 and vide Exhibit (i) appended....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ltra Tech Cement Ltd. in Civil Appeal No.11261 of 2016. He further submits that invoices would need to be verified as the same have not been submitted before the lower authorities. 4. Heard both sides and examined the records. 5. I find that the appellant had given breakdown of Cenvat credit taken for transportation from their factory to depot, to the dealers from depot to CSD and to their other factory in their letter dated 11.5.2012 addressed to adjudicating authority. The same was also submitted before the Commissioner (Appeals). However, both authorities have not dealt with the said letter and the breakdown given in the said letter. The judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. has been delivered on 01.02....