2016 (10) TMI 185

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... esident and Mr. B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Rep. by Shri Jatin Mahajan, Advocate for the Rep. by Shri G.R.Singh, DR  for the respondent. ORDER These two appeals though against different impugned orders  are taken up together as the issue involved is identical. The appellants are operating as 100% EOU and are engaged in the manufacture of Stand Stone and Slate Articles. The i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... her or not the process undertaken by the appellant amounts to manufacture and consequently, eligible for refund of accumulated credit on input services in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.The ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that for the subsequent periods, in the appellant's own case, refunds are being sanctioned and there is no further appeal by the Department. We also take no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l held that the refund of cenvat credit takne on inputs, where for the same reason, the same could not be utilized  for clearing final products, refund under Rule  5 may be granted. The said decision  was upheld by the Honble Madras High Court reported in 2015  (320) ELT-A 24 (Madras).The Board  vide Circular dated 6.597 clarified that a broader view was called for in res .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X