2009 (5) TMI 748

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Appellant. Ms. M.I.J. Micheal, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. - Demand for Rs. 1,42,78,588/- being the Cenvat credit availed on capital goods has been disallowed to the appellants and an equal amount of penalty has been imposed on the ground of wrong availment of Cenvat credit. Appellants had entered into an agreement with M/s. ITC Ltd. for manu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ocate on behalf of the appellants submitted that the provisions of Rule 4(3) of the Rules on the basis of which credit has been denied is not at all applicable. The rule actually extends the benefit even if the machinery has been hired from a financing company. It cannot be interpreted to mean that if the machinery has been hired from a non financing company, credit is not admissible. He also cite....