TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 547X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses undertaken in the factory do result in new and distinct products and such process can be considered as process of manufacture, even if the inputs as well as final products are classifiable in the same CTH - Once it is held that process amounts to manufacture, there can be no justification to deny cenvat credit on the inputs. In any case, it is settled position of law that even if the activity undertaken does not amount to manufacture, when duty is levied, the credit cannot be denied by upholding that there is no manufacture. Credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No.54626-54627 of 2014 - A/55659-55660/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 2-8-2017 - Mr. (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President And Mr. V. Padma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n behalf of the appellant that the departmental officers, even though they visited the factory, did not properly appreciated the activities carried out in the factory. He submitted photographs of the some of the products being manufactured and argued that a new and distinct product comes into existence as a result of the processes carried out in the factory. Accordingly, he justified the cenvat credit. He further, submitted that cenvat credit availed, in any case is being reversed and utilized at the time of clearance of final products by paying central excise duty. 5. Learned DR supported the impugned order. He also placed reliance on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Printo India Graphics (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi [2012 (275) ELT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ELT 785 (Guj)] is reproduced below:- 6. When one goes through the order of the first appellate authority, it is apparent that the respondent has been held to be a manufacturer as defined in Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellate authority has taken into consideration the activities carried on by the respondent-assessee. The Tribunal is justified in holding that if the activity of the respondent-assessee does not amount to manufacture there can be no question of levy of duty, and if duty is levied, Modvat credit cannot be denied by holding that there is no manufacture. 8. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order denying the cenvat credit is not sustainable and hence set aside. In the result, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
