2011 (10) TMI 324

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion to manufacture Held That:- Board itself clarified in Circular No.943/4/2011-CX, dt.29.4.2011CCE credit is admissible. Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement (2010 -TMI - 78203 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) & CCE Mumbai Vs. GTC Ltd larger bench (2008 -TMI - 31592 - CESTAT MUMBAI), input service should be treated as one similar to input, credit is admissible.
MR. B.S.V. MURTHY, J. Represented by: Shri Jagdis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... input service is also treated as input, he relies upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. Vs. CCE Delhi - 2009 (240) ELT 641 (SC). 3. The ld.Counsel for the respondent relies upon the Circular No.943/4/2011-CX, dt.29.4.2011, to submit that the Board itself clarified that the benefit of CENVAT Credit is admissible. He also relies upon the decision of Hon'ble Hi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X