9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R for the respondent ORDER Per B. Ravichandran The appeal is against order dated 2.9.2015 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Jodhpur. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of white cement liable to central excise duty. They are also availing cenvat credit on various inputs, capital goods and input services in terms of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The dispute in the present appeal relates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t services. The same is only a clarificatory amendment. The ld. Counsel relies on the various decided cases in support of his claim. 3. Ld. AR reiterated the findings of the Original Authority. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 5. We note that the similar dispute came before the Tribunal in case of Mangalam Cement Ltd. & Ors. The Tribunal vide Final Order Nos.56683 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mbika Overseas - 2012 (25) S.T.R. 348 (P&H). Considering the conflict in judgments of different High Courts and also the notification dated 03/02/2016, this Tribunal in the case of Essar Steel India Ltd. (supra) has held that the said notification should be considered as declaratory in nature and effective retrospectively. The relevant paragraph in the said decision is extracted herein below :- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f sale of dutiable goods on commission basis. Further, by inserting the Explanation in the Rule 2(l), it has confirmed the Board Circular and resolved the different views of the High Courts. Taking into circumstances under which the Explanation was inserted in Rule 2(l) of Rules, 2004 and consequence of the Explanation to extend the benefit to the assessee as per Board Circular, we hold that the E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
