TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 665X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent. ORDER [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President] . - Heard both sides. 2. The appeal is being taken up for regular hearing in view of the request made by the Revenue. 3. The appellant filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise whereby a demand of Cenvat credit of ₹ 3,16,05,579/- is confirmed after denying credit of duty pai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und that the activity undertaken by the appellant does not amount to manufacture. 5. The contention is that the appellant had paid more duty than the credit denied. Part of the duty paid is from PLA. The appellant relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE, Surat-III v. Creative Enterprises reported in 2009 (235) E.L.T. 785 (Guj.), which is upheld by the Hon b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty and also started availing credit of duty paid on the inputs. Now the Revenue has changed its opinion and demand is confirmed after denying credit on the ground that credit of duty paid on inputs on the ground that the activity of cutting and slitting of jumbo rolls does not amount to manufacture. We find that the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Creative Enterprises (supra) held that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
