2008 (9) TMI 342

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 : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)].- These appeals have been filed against Adjudication Nos. 116 & 117/2002-03 RP, dated March, 2003 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam. 2. Shri G. Prabhakar Sastry, the learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and Smt. Sudha Koka, the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue. 3. We heard bot .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e demanded the Cenvat credit taken on this input spares on the ground that they had not been used in the manufacture of final products and their values have been written off. In view of that he had taken a view that the appellants are not entitled for the credit. Hence, the duty proposed in the show cause notice was confirmed. Penalty equal to the duty confirmed was imposed. Interest was also dema .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... heet purposes, the realistic value has been shown it does not mean that the Modvat credit or Cenvat credit should be denied. The appellants stated that the Tribunal in their own case had taken earlier a decision in their favour. 5. The learned Departmental Representative referred to the Board's circular dated 16-7-2002 para 3 and also our attention was invited to the amendment in the Cenvat Credi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... removed from the factory. Our attention was also invited to two decisions. Wherein the same issue was examined by this Tribunal and decision was given in favour of the party in the case of Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore - 2002 (50) RLT 208 (Tri.-Bang.) and in the case of M/s. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam - 2005 (19 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... are capable of being used and when they were available in the factory, there is no justification in demanding the reversal of credit and there is no justification also for imposing such a high penalty on the appellants. In these circumstances, the impugned order is not justified. We set aside the same and allow the appeal with consequential relief. (Pronounced in open Court on 25-9-2008)
Cas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X