9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order denying Cenvat credit on the capital goods to the appellant. 2. The facts of the case are that appellant procured the capital goods during the period 1-4-2006 to 11-8-2006 and availed Cenvat credit thereon. Thereafter, they proposed extension of capacity of production and they availed exemption Notification No. 49/2003, dated 10-6-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that they are not entitled to take Cenvat credit on these capital goods. To support his contention he relied upon the decision of Spenta International Ltd. v. CCE, Thane [2007 (216) E.L.T. 133 (Tri.-LB)]. Therefore, it is prayed that impugned order be set aside and appeal be allowed. 5. On the other hand, learned AR opposed the contention of the learned Counsel and submits that these capital ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as dutiable. Therefore, I am of the view that appellant is entitled to take Cenvat credit on these capital goods. Reliance placed by learned AR in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Ltd. (supra) have no relevance to the facts of this case as in that case, the capital goods were procured before commencement of commercial production, in that case it was the duty of the adjudicating authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
