9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... power plant is not covered under the central excise registration issued to Appellant. Further Ld. Commissioner found that consent letter was issued to M/s Sanghi Industries Ltd. for installation of Captive Power Plant for their Cement Plant at Village Akri, Distt. Kutchh and same was not for the Appellant i.e M/s Sanghi Industries Ltd. (Cement Division), Clinker Unit, Sanghipuram, P.O. Motiber, Taluka Abdasa, Distt. Kutchh. It is found that for the availment of Cenvat credit on disputed capital goods, appellant first prove that the said power plant where the capital goods was used are belong to them - in the interest of justice one opportunity can be extended to the appellant to prove that power plant where the capital goods were used ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 01.2006, wherein he admitted the said facts. It was alleged by the revenue that the cenvat credit availed by the appellant on capital goods during the period from January 2002 to July 2004 is not admissible to them. Accordingly , a detail show cause notice dated 12.12.2006 demanding Cenvat Credit demand of Rs. 1,29,61,793/- was issued to the appellant. In adjudication, Ld. Commissioner, Central Excise Customs, Rajkot vide Order-In-Original dated 24.01.2008 disallowed the cenvat credit. Being aggrieved with the said order appellant preferred an appeal before CESTAT and vide final order dated 30.07.2008 CESTAT remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision on merits as also on limitation. Hence in pursuance thereof, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the following decisions. CCE Vs. H.M.M Ltd. -1995(76)ELT 497 (SC) Raj Bahadur Narain Singh Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. UOI -1996(88)ELT 24 (SC) (iii)Kaur Singh Vs. CCE -1997(94)ELT 289 (SC) P B Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE -2003(153)ELT 14 (SC) 2.3 He also argued that department has issued periodical show cause notice to the appellant denying credit on inputs used at power plant on the ground that the power plant is located outside the clinker unit as well as the grinding unit and therefore credit is not admissible. Thus, all the essential facts relevant to the present case were known to the department that appellant are availing credit in respect of inputs used at power plant that power plant is located outside the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observed that the present case is in respect of cenvat credit taken at their Clinker unit on the capital goods which were installed at power plant, which is around 14 KMs away from the Clinker unit and said power plant is not covered under the central excise registration issued to Appellant. Further Ld. Commissioner found that consent letter was issued to M/s Sanghi Industries Ltd. for installation of Captive Power Plant for their Cement Plant at Village Akri, Distt. Kutchh and same was not for the Appellant i.e M/s Sanghi Industries Ltd. (Cement Division), Clinker Unit, Sanghipuram, P.O. Motiber, Taluka Abdasa, Distt. Kutchh. 4.2 We find that for the availment of Cenvat credit on disputed capital goods, appellant first prove that the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
