9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 883X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase, although the Commissioner of Central Excise Meerut-I was holding the additional charge of Commissioner of Central Excise Meerut-II but that cannot be termed as a Committee of Commissioners constituted in the provisions of law. Hence the preliminary objection taken by the assessee is a valid objection. Hence the appeals filed by the Revenue are not proper and correct in view of the law as there is not proper permission from the Committee of Commissioners to file the appeals before this Tribunal. In favour of assessee. - E/344-345 and 845-847/2007-SM(BR) - 1444-1448/2010-SM(BR)(PB), - Dated:- 20-10-2010 - Shri Ashok Jindal, J. Shri Kapil Vaish, C.A., for the Assessee. Shri Anil Khanna, SDR, for the Department. [Order]. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh Court of Chattisgarh recently in the case of Ambuja Cements Eastern Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur reported in 2010 (256) E.L.T. 690 (Chatt.) and the same view has been taken by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCE, Bangalore v. Alfred Herbert (India) Ltd. reported in 2010 (257) E.L.T. 29 (Kar.). Accordingly, they are entitled to avail cenvat credit on welding electrodes which are used for maintenance and repair of plant and machinery as capital goods or inputs. He took a preliminary objection to the appeals filed by the Revenue saying that a proper approval of Review Committee has not been obtained by the Department before filing the appeal before this Tribunal as the Review consists of two Commissioners but the Review has been m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heard both the sides. On a careful examination of the submissions and reliance placed by both the parties, I find that first I will deal with the issue of welding electrodes. The learned DR submitted that in the case of SAIL, the Hon ble Apex Court has held that Cenvat credit on electrodes is not available. But I have seen the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court. In that case, the decision of the Apex Court involving the period prior to 2000 wherein the earlier provision of modvat credit rules were available and in the case of Alfred Herbert (India) Ltd., the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka has dealt with the issue and held that the decision of SAIL is not applicable after 2000 when the amendment in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2000 took place. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
