2012 (10) TMI 335

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... V.K. Agarwal for the Respondent. ORDER Ashok Jindal, Judicial Member - Vide this appeal the appellants have challenged the impugned order for denial of utilization of CENVAT credit for payment of excise duty on the final product and output service provided by them. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturer of transmission towers and also providing services of erection .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd penalties. Therefore, the appellants are in appeal before us. 3. After hearing both sides, we are of the view that the appeal itself can be disposed of. Therefore, after granting waiver of the requirement of pre-deposit, we take up the appeal as well stay application for final disposal. 4. As discussed above, the allegation against the appellants are that as they are not maintaining a separat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt of excisable goods and for payment of service tax. The said issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Forbes Marshall (P.) Ltd. v. CCE 2010 (258) ELT 571 wherein this Tribunal has observed that there is no provision in CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, for segregation of input services utilized in manufacture or to provide output service. Following the said decision, we maintain here also that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X