TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of credit, which is supported by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Precot Meridian Ltd. [2015 (11) TMI 323 - SUPREME COURT]. The impugned order is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief - Appeal No. ST/456/11-Mum - A/87281/16/STB - Dated:- 30-3-2016 - Mr. M. V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Shri H.S. Shirsat, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri P. Vinitha Sekhar, Dy. Commr. (A.R.) ORDER Per M. V. Ravindran This appeal is filed by the appellant against Order-in-Original No. 14/ST/Commr./2011 dated 17.03.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs Service Tax, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kartar Rolling Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi 2006 TIOL 46 SC CX and on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector of Customs (Preventive), Amritsar Vs. Malwa Industries Limited 2009 TIOL 17 SC CX. 5. On considering the submissions made by both sides, we find that the issue involved in this case is in a narrow compass. The appellant availed the benefit of Notification No. 01/2006-ST on discharge of Service Tax liability after availing the abatement of 67% but it is denied on the ground that he had availed the CENVAT credit on the inputs and input services during the material period. We find that there is also no dispute that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal in the case of Franco Italian Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner [2000 (120) E.L.T. 792 (T.-LB)] had taken the view that even if the MODVAT credit was utilised but, thereafter, refunded, it would amount to not utilising the said MODVAT credit. Same view has been taken by the High Court of Allahabad in Hello Minerals Water (P) Ltd. v. Union of India [2004 (174) E.L.T. 422 (All.)]. 4. On a specific query put by the Court, we were informed that as far as the aforesaid two judgments are concerned, they were accepted by the Department and no appeal was filed there against. In the impugned judgment, the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee relying upon the aforesaid two decisions. 5. We, thus, do not find any reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
