ABHISHEK INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both sides and perused the records.

(2.) The demand has been made in the present case on the ground that Appellants had been erroneously refunded Additional Excise Duty (AED TTA) paid on inputs used in the production of exported items. The contention of the representative of the Company is that AED also is eligible for credit and the lower authorities are not justified in holding that credit was not due to them. The Appellant relied upon the clarification dated 9 -2 -2004 of the Board, i.e. F. No. 267/11/2003 -CX. 8 in this regard. It is also pointed out that during the pendency of the present stay application, lower authorities made recoveries by adjustment in the Appellants' rebate claims in respect of other reports. A further point was also made that the Appellant has already made debit of the amount from their RG 23A account.

(3.) Learned Senior Departmental Representative submits that AED (TTA) is not attracted on the finished products in terms of Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules and refund is not available to the Appellant.