2019 (2) TMI 206

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dent: Mr. L. Patra (AR) ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair The brief facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of passenger cars falling under Chapter 8702 and 8703 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. They are also availing benefit of Cenvat Credit in terms of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellants were procuring components from various vendors for use in the assembly a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... such re-credited amount of Rs. 66,05,388/- on the ground that the appellant could not have taken suo moto credit whereas they should have followed the procedure of filing of refund under Section 11B. Being aggrieved by the order in original appellant filed the present appeal. 2. Sh. Anand Nainawati, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that it is only a clerical error due t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Patra, Ld. Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that the appellant is not entitled for suo moto re-credit. They should have followed the procedure of refund under Section 11B. In support he placed reliance on the following judgments: • BDH Industries Ltd. 2008 (229) ELT 364 (Tri. LB) • Gar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... twice payment of duty. Therefore, the decision of Larger Bench is not applicable in the present case. Similarly, the decision cited in the case of Steelco Gujarat Ltd. and Garden Silk Mills Ltd. (supra) by the Revenue are distinguished. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Motorola India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) clearly held that if the amount paid by mistake in excess of the duty such amount....