2007 (12) TMI 174

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Heard learned Jt. CDR. None appeared on behalf of the respondents inspite of notice. Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the appeal filed by the respondent was allowed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of man made yarn and were working under the Cenvat credit scheme. The respondents are taking credit in respect of duty pa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , set aside the demand and penalty. The contention of the Revenue is that as per the Cenvat Credit Rules, the manufacturer can take credit of the duty paid on inputs which are used in or in relation to the manufacture of excisable goods. The processing undertaken by the respondents in respect of the goods received back in the factory such as rewinding and repacking does not amount to manufacture. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at the goods were cleared after repair. It is settled law that manufacturer is not entitled for credit in respect of inputs used for repair as repair does not amount to manufacture. In these circumstances, the impugned order is not sustainable, hence, set aside and the order passed by the adjudicating authority is restored and the appeal is allowed. (Dictated in the open Court)
Case laws, Dec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X