9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant Shri A.K. Samota, Superintendent (Authorized Representative) for the Respondent ORDER RAMESH NAIR The brief facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of packaging material falling under Chapter heading 39 and 48 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have procured printing cylinder falling under Chapter heading No. 84425010, required for the production ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion Notification No. 49/2006-CE is incorrect on the face of clarification issued by the suppliers' jurisdictional Chief Commissioner whereby it was clarified that the goods manufactured by the supplier manufacturer have paid the duty correctly and also directed to continue paying duty without availing benefit of Notification No. 49/2006-CE, therefore, the suppliers have paid the duty correctly an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SC) 3. Shri A.K. Samota, learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that the sole ground for denial of cenvat credit to the appellant is that the supplier of printing cylinder was not supposed to pay the duty as the same were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... linder, there is no ambiguity that the supplier have correctly paid the duty without availing the Exemption Notification 49/2006-CE dated 30.12.2006. The entire basis for denial of the credit is on the view which was completely contrary to the clarification given in the above letter dated 08.08.2013. We find that it is the supplier's Jurisdictional Officers who have to assess whether duty was corr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
