9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n'ble High Court of Mumbai. Secondly, it is also observed that the duty paid by the appellant has been accepted by the department and nothing has been brought to out notice that the appellant was asked by the Revenue at any stage for not paying Central Excise duty when process did not amount to manufacture. In this regard, appellant has correctly placed reliance on the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Markwell Paper Plast Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Cus. & C.Ex., Noida (2012 (7) TMI 290 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI) - it is held that the Cenvat credit was correctly availed by the appellant - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No.E/569/2012-DB - - - Dated:- 4-12-2013 - Mr. M V Ravindran and Mr. H K Thakur, JJ. For the Appellant : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... where also it was held that if a process does not amount to manufacture but the goods are cleared on payment of duty accepted by the Revenue then in such situation Cenvat credit cannot be denied. 3. Shri K. Shivakumar, A.R. appearing on behalf of Revenue argued that if the process does not amount to manufacture, then no Cenvat credit with reference to duty paid on inputs is admissible as per the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. It is observed that admissibility of Cenvat credit on slitting of CRGO coils cleared is no more res integra and has been decided by the Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in the case of Ajinkya Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Central Excise., Pune-III (supra) which has been upheld b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Cenvat credit availed by the appellant on the inputs on the plea that the final product has not emerged from the process which could be termed as manufactured. Such an argument, in our view cannot be sustained as it is against the tenets of equity and justice. The department having accepted the excise duty on the final product cannot be permitted to deny Cenvat credit on the inputs used for the manufacture of the final product on such a technical plea. If such an argument is allowed to sustain it would negate the entire object of the Cenvat credit scheme which has been put in place with a view to protect the assessee from double taxation. Thus, on this count also, the impugned orders are not sustainable. 5. In view of the above settl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
