2015 (10) TMI 1576

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ry The appellant M/s Aadi Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd. is in appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. PII/AV/29/2011 dated 29.04.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant is engaged in manufacture of plastic articles falling under Chapter Head 39 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and has availed the facility of CENVAT credit. One of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ervice. The contention is that the Tribunal in the case of Rathi Bars Ltd. Vs.CCE, Jaipur - 2012 (283) ELT 565 (Tri.-Del.) while relying the aforesaid Board's Circular allowed the appeal of the assessee. 4. The learned Counsel further argues that the issue is squarely covered by the Board's Circular as well as by the ruling of this Tribunal in the case of Rathi Bars Limited (supra) and ot .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ned A.R. further emphasises that in the facts of the given case the service receiver is not the appellant and accordingly prays for upholding the impugned order. 6. Having heard the parties and considered the rival contentions, I hold that in the facts of this case it is the appellant who is the receiver of transport service. It is immaterial as to who facilitates the transportation to the appell .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X