2005 (11) TMI 406

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Respondent. [Order]. - The appellants, on two occasions, removed from their factory capital goods on which Cenvat credits had been availed and which had been used in the factory for the manufacture of final products. The first removal was on 11-2-2002, and the second on 2-5-2003. The removal of capital goods on the first occasion was made in terms of the erstwhile provisions of Rule 57S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eir submissions, I find that the Department is asking for duty equal to Cenvat Credit availed in terms of sub-rule 4 of Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 as amended under the Cenvat Credit (Second Amendment) Rules, 2003. This sub-rule which came into force on 1-3-2003 reads as under:- "(4) When Inputs or capital goods, on which Cenvat credit has been taken, are removed as such from the fa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the case of Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli [Appeal No. E/421/2005] [2005 (190) E.L.T. 450 (Tri. - Bang.), wherein, in respect of a debonded EOU, it was held, for a comparable period, that there was nothing in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 for demanding duty on Cenvated capital goods removed after use in the factory of production of final products. On the tim....