TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 937X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the time of receipt of capital goods, the final products of the appellant were chargeable to nil rate of duty and therefore these capital goods fall within the purview of sub rule 4 of rule 6 and hence not entitled to Cenvat credit. The only argument advanced by the appellant is that the credit has been taken in the same financial year in which their final products became dutiable. We find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hemselves with the Central Excise Department, the appellant availed CENVAT credit on capital goods and services received by them during the period 01/04/2005 to 28th of February 2006, during which period their final products were exempted from payment of Central excise duty. The original authority, vide his order dated 05.11.2007 confirmed the demand of CENVAT credit availed by the appellant on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e manufacture of exempted goods or in providing exempted services, other than the final products which are exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon under any notification where exemption is granted based upon the value or quantity of clearances made in a financially 4. There is no doubt that at the time of receipt of the capital goods, the final products of the appellant w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bench is applied in the appellant s case we arrive at the inevitable conclusion that since on the date of receipt of capital goods, the final products were chargeable to nil rate of duty, the appellant becomes in-eligible for availing the credit of duty paid on the capital goods. Hence, the impugned order is upheld. 6. In line with the above discussions, the appeal is dismissed. ( Pronoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
