2011 (11) TMI 240

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1.3 The learned C.A. for the assessee submits that the order DATED 25.2.2009 of the original authority was taken for revision by the Commissioner who passed order dated 22.12.2009  enhancing penalty imposed under Section 76 and against the said order, the assessee has filed appeal No. ST/849/2010 which is pending before the Tribunal. Accordingly, the connected appeal was also called for and taken up for disposal. 2. Heard both sides. 3.1 The relevant facts, in brief are, that the appellant is a manufacturer of pesticides and insecticides falling under Chapter 38 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.  They were availing CENVAT credit facility for discharging Central Excise duty on the final products manufactured and clear....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Commissioner of C.Ex., Chandigarh Vs. M/s Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. & Ors. [2010-TIOL-868-HC-P&H-ST] submits that the question of law as to whether a recipient of GTA service, as a deemed service provider,  can utilize the CENVAT credit on inputs/input services/capital goods taken by them,  has been decided in favour of the assessee. 6.1 I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides.  Any manufacturer or a service provider takes credit of excise duty paid on inputs/capital goods, customs duty in the form of CVD paid on inputs/capital goods and service tax paid on input service, and maintains a common account. The CENVAT Credit R....