TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 835
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee-written submission ORDER Per V. Padmanabhan The present appeal filed by Revenue is directed against the order-in-original dated 27.04.2012 passed by the Commissioner, Jaipur. The assessee is engaged in the manufacture of Electronic Process Control Equipment falling under Chapter 85 of the first Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. The appellant received certain goods such as instrument....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r dropped all such demands. Hence, Revenue is in appeal. 2. Heard Shri Yogesh Agarwal, ld. AR. None appeared on behalf of respondent-assessee. While the ld. AR reiterated the grounds of appeal, in the written submissions received from the respondent they have relied upon the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE&C, Surat-III vs. Creative Enteprises 2009 (23....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nced value. I find that it has not been alleged that the assessee had retained or misused any credit for their own benefit. I find that the amount paid as duty on clearance of impugned goods was credited to the Govt. account and as such payment of the duty amounted to the reversal of the credit. I find that in various case laws it has held that when the process is held to be not manufacture, then ....