2012 (8) TMI 840

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ector, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The short issue required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether the appellant is entitled to credit of duty paid on stone crushers and their parts used in the mines for crushing of limestone and transportation of the same to the appellant's factory. 2. The lower authorities have admitted that the issue is covered by the Apex Court decisio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....central excise authorities is no criteria for treating the appellant as separate or an outside unit. Further he submits that Maihar Cement came into existence in the year 1979 and mines were allotted to them by the State Govt. Thereafter, Maihar Cement Unit No. 2 was floated in the year 1994 as second unit of parents company M/s. Century Textile & Industries. As such both the units, i.e., Maihar C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nit No. 2, the same cannot be considered to be captive mines. 5. I find that there is no dispute about the legal position. The dispute relates to the factual aspect as to whether the mines are captive mines of Maihar Cement Unit No. 2 or not? The lower authorities have held against the appellant on the sole ground that both the units are separately registered with the Central Excise authorities....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s for both the units. If that be so, the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vikram Cement referred (supra) would be applicable. 6. Apart from above, I also find that Tribunal in the case of Maihar Cement vide its Final Order No. 433/2008, dated 3-7-2008 has allowed the credit in respect of cement items. The subsequent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras....