Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2024 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 226 - CESTAT CHENNAICENVAT Credit of CVD paid on the import of goods and using the same for discharging excise duty on the products cleared after undertaking the activity of packing/repacking, labeling/relabeling - process amounting to manufacture or not - HELD THAT:- The appellant has discharged Central Excise duty on the products during the disputed period. For this reason, the department cannot disallow credit alleging that the activity does not amount to ‘manufacture’ - reliance placed in the decision of the Tribunal in the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE VERSUS AJINKYA ENTERPRISES [2012 (7) TMI 141 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and M/S. LUK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF GST & CENTRAL EXCISE, SALEM [2024 (2) TMI 1018 - CESTAT CHENNAI]. Revenue has argued that the department has revoked Central Excise Registration issued to the appellant and therefore the activity has to be held as not amounting to ‘manufacture’. On perusal of the dates, it is seen that the registration has been revoked only after the disputed period. The appellant was holding Central Excise registration for the disputed period which is from 1.2.2013 to 1.1.2014. The disallowance of credit is not justified. The impugned order is set aside - Appeal is allowed.
|