2022 (12) TMI 464

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of mistake in two separate appeals which have been disposed of vide the common Final Order No. A/51368-51370/2019 dated 22.10.2019. The rectification in the said Final Order has been prayed to the effect that the Final Order has remanded the matter back with respect to the denial of Cenvat Credit on account of ineligible documents directing the adjudicating authority to pass a detailed order either denying or holding appellants entitled for Cenvat Credit on the basis of the documents. However, the remand order is with respect to denial of Cenvat Credit of Rs.4,30,31,449/- despite that an amount of Rs.9,79,334/- has been denied on the ground of ineligible documents for a period of June, 2002 to March, 2004 in the Appeal No.E/1288/2006 and an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng the Cenvat Credit with respect to all those items on the ground of all of them being directly or indirectly used in the manufacture of final product of the appellant. Few items though have not been specifically mentioned in the order, but are duly covered under the entire discussion. Hence, the non-mention cannot be alleged as such omission, which amounts to error apparent on face of record. 5. It is further submitted that it is with respect to denial of Cenvat Credit of Rs.4,30,31,445/- only that the matter has been remanded back to the adjudicating authority and the rest of the entire Cenvat Credit has been allowed to the appellants. There is no error apparent on record. Application is prayed to be dismissed. 6. Having heard the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....djudicating authority was still of the opinion that the capital goods were not eligible for Cenvat Credit. We observe that vide the impugned Final Order the said observation of the adjudicating authority has been set aside holding that the capital goods which are used for producing or processing, although not being directly used, the same will satisfy the requirement of then Rule 57Q of Cenvat Credit Rules. Based thereupon the then appellants/ assessee respondent herein were held entitled to avail the Cenvat Credit on all those capital goods. 10. In the light of these findings we are of the opinion that even if, few capital goods have not been specifically mentioned in the order such as G.I. wires and Galvanized Sheets, Valve Grinding Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e amount of Rs.4,30,31,499/- has been directed to be verified and then to pass a detailed order either denying or holding appellant entitled for the Cenvat Credit but on the basis of those documents. 13. We observe that the aforesaid amount is not the amount of credit disallowed on the basis inadmissible documents in any of these two appeals. We hold the same to be such typographical error which is very much apparent on face of record of the impugned final order. The findings in this respect are mentioned in para 16 of the impugned final order. But the amount of credit in these two appeals, which has been denied on the ground of inadmissible documents, has not been mentioned in said para of the impugned final order. Hence, to that extent....