2009 (3) TMI 302

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appeal is filed by the Department of Customs challenging the order dated 19-6-2008 passed in Final Order Nos. 713-714/2008 by the CESTAT (Appellate Tribunal). 2. The relevant facts of the case are that the respondent is a 100% Export Oriented Unit ('EOU' for short) engaged in the manufacture of parts of agricultural and farm equipment which are chargeable to 'Nil' rate of duty by Central Excis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... claims for Rs. 9,42,963/- for the period October 2005 to March 2006; Rs. 4,52,883/- for the period April 2006 to June 2007; Rs. 5,23,185/- for the period July 2006 to September 2006, and Rs. 12,20,008/- for the period from October 2006 to November 2006, totalling to Rs. 31,39,039/-, were also rejected by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs vide order dated 24-3-2007 for the aforesaid reason. It....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....008 (224) E.L.T. 573 (T)] against which Order CSTA No. 11/2008 was preferred before this Court, which was also dismissed by order dated 28-6-2008 [2009 (233) E.L.T. 40 (Kar.)]. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. 5. She has stated that in view of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Cenvat credit is not available to the respondent, but, however, the Tribunal accepted ....