TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds are supplied by 100% EOU but invoices were issued under Rules 52A and 173G of Central Excise Rules, 1944 which were not having issued it under Rule 100 E ibid i.e. appellant. in the case there. Here the invoices have been issued by 100% EOU under the prescribed Rule, paid duty thereon and goods have been received by the appellant, therefore, the case relied upon by the learned AR have no relevance to the facts of the case. Moreover, the decision of Balakrishna Industries Ltd.(2015 (1) TMI 938 - CESTAT NEW DELHI) , the facts were similar to the facts of this case. In that case also the manufacturer-supplier has taken the benefit of exemption notification No. 44/2001 which was not entitled to and cleared the goods to the manufacturer-suppl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e condition of notification No. 23/03 CE dated 31.3.03. Therefore, appellant is not entitled to take Cenvat credit. Both the lower authorities have denied the Cenvat credit to the appellant. Consequently, the duty demand along with interest was confirmed. Equivalent amount of penalty was also imposed. Aggrieved from the said order, appellant is before me. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that if the manufacturer supplier has not complied with the condition of notification for availing exemption, appellant is not concerned with them. In fact as per Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the appellant has to show whether the goods in question are duty paid and goods have been received by them physically. Moreover the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of notification No. 23/03 CE dated 31.3.03 as per Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 7. Learned AR relied on the decision of Devta Steel Rolling Mills (supra) wherein the dispute was that whether the documents on which the appellant has taken credit was duty paying documents or not. In the case in hand, the issue of payment of duty is not in dispute. Therefore, the said case cannot be relied on. In the case of S K Industries P Ltd. (supra) although the goods are supplied by 100% EOU but invoices were issued under Rules 52A and 173G of Central Excise Rules, 1944 which were not having issued it under Rule 100 E ibid i.e. appellant. in the case there. Here the invoices have been issued by 100% EOU under the prescribed Rule, pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
