TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 764
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is for dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty of Rs.20,77,60,576/- confirmed against the applicant/appellant and penalty of Rs. One crore imposed upon them. As per facts on record the appellant imported motor vehicle components and paid Countervailing Duty at the time of clearance of the same. As the appellant was registered dealer, they availed the credit of said CVD in their RG-23....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. Revenue was aware of the said activity of the appellant and as such no suppression or mala fide can be attributed to them so as to invoke the longer period of limitation. 4. Ld. Advocate also submits that even if presuming though denying that the activity undertaken by them was manufacture, thus requiring them to pay Central Excise duty, they were admittedly entitled to the Cenvat credit of Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing and adoption of any other treatment on the goods renders the product marketable and is required to be held an activity of manufacture. Inasmuch as the appellant have admittedly undertaken re-packing of the imported goods as also done re-labelling, the activity undertaken by the appellant would clearly fall within the said definition. She also submits that though the appellant was filing monthl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en by the appellant is a manufacture activity or not and without going into the plea of limitation, we find that plea of Revenue neutrality raised by the appellant is just and fair and tilts the merits of the case in favour of the appellant. There is no dispute that the appellant had paid Countervailing Duty at the time of import of the goods and the credit of the same was available to them, for t....