Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Sundaram Fasteners Limited vs Cce Chennai-I on 28 June, 2018
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal No.E/41813/2017
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.117/2017 (CXA-I) (CH-I) dt.
28.04.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise
(Appeals-I), Chennai]
Sundram Fasteners Ltd.(Autolec Dvn.) Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise,
Chennai-I Respondent
Appearance:
Shri M. Kannan, Advocate For the Appellant Shri R. Subramaniyan, AC (AR) For the Respondent CORAM:
Hon'ble Shri P. Dinesha, Panda, Judicial Member Date of hearing/decision :28.06.2018 FINAL ORDER No. 41878 / 2018 Aggrieved by the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dt. 28.04.2017, the appellant has approached this forum.
2. The present appeal relates to the period 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. A show cause notice dt. 30.04.2014 was issued to the appellant on the ground that appellant had contravened 2 provisions of Rule 3 (5B) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as they have failed to reverse the credit taken on the inputs for which provision has been made in their books of accounts to write off the value thereon. Considering the reply and the personal hearing, the Ld. Adjudicating authority passed an order dt. 31.03.2016 confirming the proposals made in the show cause notice. On appeal, the Ld.Commissioner (Appeals), vide an order dt. 28.04.2017 (impugned order) dismissed the appeal of the appellant-assessee by observing that appellant put forth various contentions against reversal of credit, without producing any documentary evidence to prove their claim that they had reversed the credit subsequently and the same was reflected in the duly audited books of account for the relevant period.
3. Heard Shri M.Kannan,Ld. Counsel for the appellant. Ld. Counsel submits that they are in possession of relevant document and pleads if an opportunity is given, they will produce the relevant audited books of account reflecting the reversal of credit availed before the adjudicating authority.
4. Heard Shri R. Subramanian, Ld.A.R for the Revenue who contends that appellant should produce all the documents reflecting proper reversal to the satisfaction of the adjudicating authority.
5. Considering the submissions, I am of the view that interest of justice requires a remand of the matter. Accordingly, the case is remanded to the original authority to pass fresh adjudication order after affording reasonable opportunity to the appellant. It is needless to say that appellant should furnish all necessary / 3 relevant documents relied upon by them to the satisfaction of the original authority to prove its bonafides without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
Appeal is remanded to the original authority on the above terms.
(dictated and pronounced in open court) (P.DINESHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER gs 4