TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial) AND Mr. Sanjiv Srivastava, Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Shri Navneet Arora, C.A. For the Respondent : Shri Ajay Kumar, Authorised Representative ORDER PER: DR. D.M. MISRA This is an appeal filed against order-in-original No.62/BR-62/Th-I/2011 dated 10.10.2011 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-I. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant had been procuring various raw materials, viz. MS angles, MS channels, MS flats, MS round bars etc., availing cenvat credit of central excise duty paid on such items, utilizing these products by cutting, punching holes etc. and clearing the same as parts of the transmission line towers or pole ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nto manufacture, hence, proceedings initiated for recovery of the cenvat credit is not sustainable. 3.1 The learned C.A. has further submitted that once they have discharged the duty on the finished product after due intimation to the department about the processes undertaken by them in the factory by filing returns from time to time, subsequent allegation that the processes undertaken do not amount to manufacture cannot be a ground to deny cenvat credit availed on inputs, viz. MS angles, channels, beams used in the finished goods. In support, they have referred to the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Pune-III vs. Ajinkya Enterprises 2013 (294) ELT 203 (Bom). 3.2 The learned C.A. also refer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmissible. We do not find substance in the allegation of the Revenue in view of the principle of law laid down by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ajinkya Enterprises (supra). Analyzing the issue, their Lordships observed as follows:- 10. Apart from the above, in the present case, the assessment on decoiled HR/CR coils cleared from the factory of the assessee on payment of duty has neither been reversed nor it is held that the assessee is entitled to refund of duty paid at the time of clearing the decoiled HR/CR coils. In these circumstances, the CESTAT following its decision in the case of Ashok Enterprises - 2008 (221) E.L.T. 586 (T), Super Forgings - 2007 (217) E.L.T. 559 (T), S.A.I.L. - 2007 (220) E.L.T. 520 (T) = ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
