9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 634X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Ambuja Cement Eastern Ltd. Vs. CCE [2010 (4) TMI 429 - CHHAITISGARH HIGH COURT], judgement of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. Union of India - [2008 (7) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN] and the judgement of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka High Court in case of Alfred Herbert (India) Ltd. [2010 (4) TMI 424 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] has held that the Cenvat credit in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had wrongly taken Cenvat credit as capital goods amounting to Rs.2,08,143/- on the product viz. welding electrodes falling under Chapter 83 of the Central Excise Tariff in violation of Rule 2 and Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. A Show Cause Notice dated 25th March 2009 was issued to the party demanding Cenvat credit of Rs.2,08,143/- under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules read with Section 11A of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r setting aside the penalty on the assessee. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The only issue to be decided in the present appeal is whether Cenvat credit of excise duty paid on welding electrodes is admissible to the assesse in the present case. I find that issue regarding availment of Cenvat credit in respect of duty paid on welding electrodes is settled by this Tribunal vide Order No. 56117-56118/201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
