2013 (8) TMI 304

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ered by the Respondent from employees and to the extent the charges are not recovered from the employees, they would be eligible for Cenvat Credit relying upon the decision in the cases of CCE Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Limited reported in [2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and also in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I Vs. Ferromatik Milacron India Ltd. reported in [201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ble for Cenvat Credit and accordingly confirmed the Cenvat Credit demand of Rs. 3,10,407/- along with interest and imposed of penalty of equal amount. However, the appeal of Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dtd 3.12.2010 partially allowed the appeal holding that the Cenvat Credit would be inadmissible only to the extent the charges for canteen facility are re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt s factory is more than 250 and, therefore, in term of the provisions of factories Act, the appellant are required to provide canteen facility to the workers. I also find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that only to the extent the charges for canteen facility are recovered by respondent, the Cenvat Credit would be inadmissible. I, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned ord .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X