TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 918X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r manufacture of dutiable goods. The ratio of decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Spenta International Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane [2007 (8) TMI 25 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] is squarely applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case where it was held that the eligibility of Cenvat credit is to be determined with reference to the dutiability of the final product on the date of receipt of capital goods. In the present case the capital goods were received when the dutiable final products were being manufactured. Therefore, in the present case Cenvat credit was admissible to the appellants. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/2012/2008-EX[DB] - A/71085/2016-EX[DB] - Dated: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of the fact that with effect from 02/01/2006, they were manufacturing exempted goods from the said capital goods. Therefore, appellants were issued with a Show Cause Notice dated 28/12/2006, wherein it was proposed to recover Cenvat Credit of ₹ 1,33,93,777/- availed on capital goods procured during the period from August, 2003 to December, 2005 used in the manufacture of the exempted goods with effect from 02/01/2006 under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944. The issue was adjudicated by Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-II through Order-in-Original No. 14/Commr/Meerut-II/2008 dated 09/06/2008. The appellant submitted before the Original Authority that eligibility to ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me for considering the eligibility of credit is the date of receipt of capital goods into the factory. 4. The ld. D.R. reiterated the findings of the ld. Commissioner. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. Admittedly, the capital goods were capable of being used even before installing the entire range of capital goods. It is undisputed fact that the capital goods were received when the appellant was paying Central Excise duty on the clearances and that the capital goods were used for the manufacture of excisable goods on which duty was paid. The appellant opted to avail the benefit of said Notification No. 50/2003-CE with effect from 02/01/2006. Before 02/01/2006, the said capital goods were used for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
