2014 (4) TMI 54

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an: The appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal NO. BPS(374)147/2004 dated 20/10/2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Aurangabad. 2. Vide the impugned order, the appellate authority has set aside the order of the adjudicating authority dated 11/06/2004 wherein a demand of CENVAT credit amounting to Rs. 13,95,456/- was confirmed under Rule 12 of the CENVAT Cre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erein. Therefore, it has been urged that the impugned order is not sustainable in law. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that the appellant is a manufacturer of pharmaceutical products and at the time of manufacture, the gods were dutiable. Accordingly, they had taken CENVAT credit of the duty paid on the inputs. Subsequently, w.e.f 01/03/2003 the ver .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... able in law and, therefore, the appeal of the Revenue deserves dismissal. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. From the records of the case, it is seen that, at the time of taking of the credit, the goods manufactured by the appellant were dutiable and, therefore, the appellant has rightly taken the credit. However, at the time of clearance of the goods, the good .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X