2025 (7) TMI 632

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Consultant for the Appellant Mr. Aniram Meena, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER S. S. GARG : The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 27.10.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Delhi-IV, Faridabad, whereby the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the demand amounting to Rs.1,17,182/- along with interest and equa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uppliers of these bright bars and accordingly, the appellant were not eligible to avail Cenvat Credit on these inputs. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant. The adjudicating authority, after following the due process, confirmed the demand of Rs.1,17,182/- along with interest and also imposed equal penalty. Two other demands of Rs.39,139/- and Rs.27,260/- respectively were also confirmed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther submits that recently this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s O K Auto Components Pvt Ltd vs. Commr of CGST, Faridabad [Excise Appeal No. 53353 of 2014] has quashed the demand on identical issue vide its Final Order No. 60452/2025 dated 26.03.2025. 4.2 He also submits that this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Sandeep Laminators Pvt Ltd vs. CCE, Gurgaon - 2024- TIOL-407-CESTA....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....015 (10) TMI 904 CESTAT NEW DELHI • Piplani Entereprises vs. CCE, Delhi-IV - 2015 (10) TMI 902 CESTAT NEW DELHI • Aakash Auto Industries vs. CCE, Delhi-IV - 2016 (3) TMI 775 CESTAT NEW DELHI • CCE, Rohtak vs. Panch Ratna Steel Pvt Ltd - 2015 (10) TMI 1252 CESTAT NEW DELHI He submits that the department has not filed appeal against any of the above cited de....