2018 (8) TMI 535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair, The fact of the case is that the appellant have availed CENVAT credit in respect of the duty paid return goods under Rule 16 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The show cause notice was issued on the ground that the customers of the appellant while returning the goods have not shown the purpose for which it is returned. The appellant filed the reply, submitted a correl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thority has given finding as regard to place of delivery goods that LR bears the origin destination as Sinner to Daman whereas the appellant is located in Nani Daman, Dadra. Another reason for denying the credit given is that the appellant have not shown this transaction in ER-I return. He submits that there is no dispute that they have received the duty paid goods on which they have taken credit ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....use notice, the appellant have submitted the correlation chart in their reply to the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority appeared to have satisfied with the correlation chart but found fault on two points; one is that in one transport LR, the origin of the consignment is Sinner and destination is Daman whereas the appellant's factory is situated in Nani Daman, Dadra. Since Nani Dama....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has not mentioned the purpose for return, the credit cannot be denied. Moreover Rules 16 does not prescribe the condition that the supplier of the return goods should mention the purpose, it is a recipient in the present case, the appellant who should decide what are the activities to be carried out on the returned goods. Even if no activity is carried out, the transaction is squarely covered by ....