2015 (12) TMI 796

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ORDER Per Ashok Jindal: The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order. 2. The facts of the case are that a show cause notice was issued to the respondent who is engaged in manufacturing of HR slitted and pickled, CR coil, CR sheet, CR Strip, GP Sheet & Coil, PPGI coated coil etc. 3. The respondent is taking Cenvat Credit on the inputs / capital goods received by them. A show cause notic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 98999 and charged excise duty on their invoice whereas it was found that the said unpolished granite blocks attracts nil rate of duty and M/s. MPEL is neither a manufacturer. Therefore, the charging of Central Excise duty on M/s. MPEL on the said goods does not appears to be correct. Therefore, M/s. MPEL wrongly charged duty on Unpolished Granite Blocks. Consequently, the M/s. MPEL was not requi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the records. 6. On perusal of the record I find that the short issue before me is to decide whether Cenvat Credit is entitled to the respondent on the strength of the invoices issued by M/s. MPEL in respect of "Unpolished Granite Blocks" or not. In the show cause notice also there is no issue of classification. Therefore, the understanding of the Ld. AR is misplaced. Accordingly, I hold that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed by the goods and what process was taken by M/s. MPEL in the factory itself who paid duty on the said goods and same has been taken as Cenvat Credit by the respondent. He further submits that in the case of Ranbaxy Labs Ltd. Vs. CCE Chandigarh-2006 (203) ELT 213 (P&H) wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held that assessee has taken the credit on duty which was actually paid. In this case also the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed by the respondent in their factory they are entitled to take Cenvat Credit, it is immaterial that whether the impugned goods attract duty or not, when there is no dispute that these goods have suffered duty. The said view has been affirmed by the Honble High Court of P&H in the case of Ranbaxy Labs Ltd. and in the case of CEGAT. Therefore, I hold that respondent has taken Cenvat Credit correct .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X