2015 (7) TMI 1175

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Respondent. ORDER PER: S.K. MOHANTY Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Springs falling under Chapter 73 of the first schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants avails cenvat credit of Central Excise Duties paid on various inputs and capital goods used in the factory for manufacture of the finished goods. During the period De .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Pursuant to the appeal filed by the Department, the appellant herein also filed the cross objection. The appeal was disposed of by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dated 25th November, 2013 by setting aside the adjudication order dated 25.04.2013 and allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue-appellant. The impugned order is the subject mat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the factory premises and their utilization in the manufacture of the final product by the appellant. Thus, I am of the view that there is no merit in the impugned order in denying the cenvat benefit to the appellant. 3. I find that the authorities below have not specifically referred to the relevant rules, under which the penalty can be imposed on the appellant. However, on perusal of the Show .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X