2018 (5) TMI 970

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are engaged in the manufacture of Garments labels falling under Chapter sub-heading No. 49089000 and 58071010 of Central Excise Tariff Act 1985 and are availing the facility of cenvat credit under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. During the course of audit, the internal audit party observed from the trial balance that provisions were made towards inventory obsolete of raw-material for the calendar years 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 on the 31st December of each year. On being pointed out by the audit party, the appellant has reversed Rs. 5,61,616/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Sixty One Thousand Six Hundred and  Sixteen only) towards reversal of input credit on obsolete material for the year 2008-2009, 2010-2011. As regards reversal of input credit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the records were filed for verification of the Department. Therefore, the invocation of extended period of limitation is not justified. He further submitted that the cenvat credit of Rs. 2,26,375/(Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Five only) ordered to be reversed on the full provision credit on raw-material on 31.12.2007 and the provision entry realized on 29th March is perfectly legal. The learned counsel further made the submission that appellant has reversed the cenvat credit of Rs. 5,61,616/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Sixty One Thousand Six Hundred and Sixteen only) on the obsolete material for the year 2008-09, 2010-11 and the same being contested in this appeal which is only convenient to the challenge on levy o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The Tribunal in the case of Heidelberg Cement India Ltd. relied upon the following decisions: a)   Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Vs. Hercules Mech Works - 2009 (248) E.L.T. 695 (Tri-Mum) = 2009-TIOL-1057-CESTAT-MUM. b)   Solectron Centum Electronics Ltd. Vs. CCE (A), Bangalore - 2009 (240) E.L.T. 51(Tribunal) = - 2008-TIOL-2297-CESTAT-BANG c)   Krishna Industrial Corporation Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2005 (186) E.L.T. 318 d)   Eternit Everest Ltd. Vs. UOI - 1997 (89) E.L.T. 28 (Mad.) =2003-TIOL-11-HC-MAD-CX 4.   In the other hand the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5.   After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal&nbsp....