9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 624X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Raipur Versus M/s Godawari Power And Ispat Ltd. [2016 (2) TMI 863 - CESTAT NEW DELHI]. Therefore, by following the same the present appeal of the Revenue is rejected. - Decided against the Revenue - Appeal No. E/586/2009-EX(DB) - FINAL ORDER NO. 52286/2016-EX(DB) - Dated:- 28-6-2016 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Shri V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue against the same assessee involving the same issue which stands dismissed by the Tribunal vide Final order No. 50077/2016 dated 14.01.2016. For better appreciation we reproduce below the para 4 of the said order: We have heard both the sides and examined appeal records. The point for decision is whether or not the respondent is liable to pay 8% or 10% of the value of electricity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 641 (S.C.) held that the Cenvat credit could not be admissible for the inputs attributable to the generation of electricity wheeled out. As such, we find that the respondents have not taken any undue benefit and they have reversed the credit attributable to the electricity cleared outside. There is no cause for initiating action for recovery of 8% or 10% of the value of such electricity. The Dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
