9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1402X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted unit (EOU) engaged in manufacture and export of cut and polish granites in the form of dimensional blocks and slabs. For the purpose of said activities, appellant had imported and domestically procured mobile cranes, excavators, forks, lifts, compressors, generators and other material handling equipment without payment of duty. The said equipment was primarily used to carry out the manufacturing activity. For said machines, appellant used High Speed Diesel as fuel, which was procured from the DTA units. Since the fuel was procured on payment of tax from DTA units, appellant availed credit of the duty so paid on the HSD. Appellant also availed credit of Service Tax paid towards Security Services. Both the activities were reflected in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when they are eligible to avail the benefit of the said Notification. 6.3 The Revenue's contention that in terms of definition of 'input' given in Rule 2(k) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 the appellants are not entitled to claim Cenvat credit, cannot be accepted, when the Notification No. 22/2003, dated 31-3-2003 makes an EOU entitled to claim Cenvat credit on the procurement of HSD used as fuel. The case laws viz., Imperial Granites Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Sangam Spinners Ltd. (supra) will not be applicable to the present appellants, who are an EOU and not a DTA industry. 7. All the appeals are allowed in above terms by setting aside the impugned orders. 3. Learned Counsel further submits that the removal of goods by EOU is governed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter of Commr. of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad-IV Vs. Qualcomm India Pvt., Ltd., reported in 2021 -VIL-766-TEL- ST, where Hon'ble High Court held that denial of refund of credit under rule 5 Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 without there being any proceedings initiated under Rules 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for recovery of said credit is not valid and not justifiable. Learned Counsel also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in CCE & ST. BBSR Vs. M/s. Infosys Technologies Limited 2023 (9) TMI 566 - CESTAT Kolkata. 5. The Learned Authorised Representative (AR) for the Revenue reiterated the submissions and admits that the issue is covered by the decision of this Tribunal for the previous period as contended by the appellant. 6. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
