Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Ntb International Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 13 July, 2010
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI APPEAL NO. E/410/2009-Mum. (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. SRK/241/M-III/2007 dated 30.4.2008 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Mumbai-II) For approval and signature: Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) ============================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Yes of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
============================================================= M/s. NTB International Pvt. Ltd. :
Appellants VS Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II Respondents Appearance Shri H.G. Dharmadhikari, Advocate, for Appellants Shri B.P. Pereira, JDR Authorized Representative CORAM:
Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Date of decision : 13/07/2010 ORDER NO.
Per : Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Heard both sides.
2. The issues involved in the present appeal are that availment of Cenvat credit on photo copy of the Bill of Entry/Quadruplicate copy.
3. The learned Advocate for the appellant drew my attention to the impugned order wherein the lower appellate authority has not given any finding why the credit was denied on quadruplicate copy of the bill of entry. However, it is also seen that the case law cited by the appellant were not considered by the lower appellate authority for denying Cenvat credit on photocopy of the Bill of Entry.
4. Considering the said lapses, I feel that the matter needs further examination and consideration by the lower appellate authority. Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to pass a speaking order considering the contentions raised by the appellant in support of their claim. Needless to say that an opportunity be given to the appellant to present their case before passing the order.
5. With these terms, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision.
(Pronounced in court) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) Sm 2