9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 586X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. ORDER The appeal is against order dated 26.02.2016 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore. 2. The brief facts of the case relevant to the appeal are that the appellant availed cenvat credit on various raw materials imported during the period 2006-2010. The credits were in terms of 27 bills of entry. In the present appeal, the issue involved is restricted to only 7 bills of ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts were recorded by the lower authority, he still denied the credit on the ground that it is the importer, who is eligible to take credit and the name of the appellant is not figuring in the bills of entry. Ld. Counsel submitted that the reason followed by the Commissioner is without any legal basis and is totally arbitrary. When the company's name was changed with the due approval of the autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd examined the appeal records. 6. The only point for decision is eligibility of the appellant for credit on these imports covered by 7 bills of entry. The denial is only on the basis of appellant's present name not is not figuring in the bills of entry. With reference to 6 bills of entry, as discussed above, it is clear that at the time of import, the bills were filed in the name of the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (192) ELT 82 (Bombay) held that when the goods in question were duty paid and used as inputs, the credit cannot be denied on the ground that the bill of entry was not endorsed. The Tribunal in Raheja Plastics Vs. CCE, Mumbai-V - 2015-TIOL-435-CESTAT-MUM held that the cenvat credit availed by the job worker based on the bills of entry having a name of principal manufacturer canno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
