9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 541X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Narasimhan, Advocate and Shri Atul Gupta, Advocate For Appellant Shri Ashok B. Kulgod, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER These two appeals are filed by M/s Eveready Industries India Ltd, issue in both the appeals is same but for different periods. Appeal No. E/56885/13 is filed against order-in-Appeal No. 374/CE/APPL/NOIDA/2012 dated 20/12/2012 & appeal No. E/55815/2014 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icated through order-in-original No. 06/ADDL. COMMISSIONER/NOIDA/2012-13 dated 07/06/2012 wherein the original authority held that any CBEC circular based on the provisions of Rule 57D issued earlier have no relevance to the present case and confirmed the demand in the show cause notice and other demand in the notice of Rs. 6,78,201/- for subsequent period from March, 2011 to October, 2011 through ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hrough Order-in-Original No. 15-16/ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER/NOIDA/2013-14 dated 18/07/2013 which on similar set grounds confirmed the demand and imposed penalties. Appellant preferred appeal against the said order which was decided through order-in-Appeal No. NOI/EXCUS/000/APPL/143/14 dated, 25/07/2014 which is impugned order in appeal no. E/55I85/14. In the Order-in- Appeal dated 25.07.2014, Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal and further argued that the criteria for admissibility of CENVAT credit is that the inputs should be used in the manufacture. There are no allegations in the show cause notice that the inputs or input services were not duty paid or the input or input services were not received in the factory or they were not used in the manufacture. The CBEC have issued circular in the past which is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tentions of Order-in-Appeal. 5. We have considered the rival contentions' we notice that even today CBEC instruction stand that CENVAT credit is admissible in respect of input contained in any of the waste, refuse or by product' We, therefore, hold that both the show case notices in present two appeal are unsustainable. Therefore, we set aside both the orders-in-Appeal and both Orders-in- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
