2011 (2) TMI 503

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri Sridharan a/w Laxmi Menan i/b PDS Associates, for the Respondent. [Order per : J.P. Devadhar, J.]. - Heard. 2. Admit on the following question of law. 3. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in holding that under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as amended by Notification No. 4/2006, the provider of output service is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....it could not be utilised. 7. There is no dispute that the assessee fulfills all other requirements of Rule 5. However, the only dispute raised by the revenue is that Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as it stood prior to 14-3-2006 permits refund of unutilized cenvat credit only to a manufacturer and not to a provider of output service. 8. Rejecting the contention of the reven....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rer as also by the provider of output service subject to the conditions set out therein. As noted earlier the appellant fulfills all other conditions. Thus, reading the Rule 5 as it stood prior to its amendment, as a whole, it is evident that refund of unutilized credit is allowable not only to manufacturers but also available to providers of out put service. 10. The argument of the revenu....