2016 (3) TMI 1399

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 02.06.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in manufacture of electrical copper wires & cables falling under Chapter 85 of the Central Excise Act, 1985. The appellant avails cenvat credit of Central Excise duty paid on inputs used in or in r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... effect and since the appellant had supplied the goods during the period April 2007 to December, 2008 to the SEZ developers, the benefit provided therein should be applicable to the appellant. To support his above stand, the ld. Advocate has relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of C.Ex. & S.T., Bangalore vs. Fosroc Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd. reported i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... egarding retrospective application of Rule 6 ibid, amended on 31.12.2008 has already been settled by the decisions relied on by the ld. Advocate in the case of Fosroc Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd.(supra), wherein the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has held that the amendment took place in Rule 6 (6) (i) in 2008 has to be construed as retrospective in nature and the said statutory provision will be ext .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X