SAIL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RANCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) APPELLANT filed this Appeal against the impugned order whereby the credit was disallowed. In view of the small amounts the Appellants are not pressing the denial of credit of Rs. 4,660.00 (Rupees Four Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty only), Rs. 36,497.00 (Rupees Thirty Six Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Seven only), Rs. 24,300.00 (Rupees Twenty Four Thousand and Three Hundred only) and Rs. 101.00 (Rupees One Hundred and One only) mentioned at Sl. Nos. 3, 4 and 5 in Annexure to Order -in -Appeal. The Appellants are challenging the denial of credit in respect of the items mentioned in Sl. No. 1 at Annexure to Order -in -Appeal. The credit was denied on the ground that the Appellant availed the credit before filing the necessary declaration and Appellant had not asked for Condonation of Delay for necessary declaration showing sufficient cause before availing the credit. The Tribunal vide stay Order dated 5 -6 -2009 granted liberty to the Appellant to approach the proper Officer for seeking Condonation of Delay in filing the necessary declaration. The contention is that now the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise vide Order dated 12 -1 -10 condoned the delay in filing the necessary declaration. Hence the denial of credit is not sustainable.

(3.) THE contention of Revenue is that Appellant availed the credit without filing any declaration. Therefore the impugned order is rightly passed.