TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (6) TMI 659
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shri Ravi Chopra, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal by the Department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 397/CE/Appl/Ldh/2007 dated 1-1-2008 by which the order of the original authority dated 6-2-2007 which was in favour of the party was upheld. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the respondent was m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty failed to reverse the credit taken by them on the capital goods in terms of Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The party contested the show cause notice and the original authority dropped the proceedings taking into account the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Madura Coats Ltd. v. C.C.E. reported in 2005 (190) E.L.T. 450. On appeal by the Department, the Commissioner (A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in holding that 'as such' means that the capital goods have been removed without putting into use. 4.2 He also submits that the observations of the appellate authority that clearances of the capital goods was effected when the party was working under the exemption Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. dated 9-7-2004 and were not registered with the Central Excise Department are erroneous inasmuc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ied upon by the lower authorities. He also submits that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Cummins India Ltd. v. C.C.E., Pune III reported in 2007 (219) E.L.T. 911 which clearly held that goods which have been put to use for some period and removed thereafter cannot be treated as cleared, "as such", has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Commissioner v. Cummins....