2017 (4) TMI 747

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sharma, A.R. for the Respondent ORDER Per Devender Singh The appellants are in appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No.540/BK/RTK/2011 dated 30.12.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Delhi-III (Gurgaon). 2. Brief facts of the case are that, appellants M/s. Vij Engineers & Consultants Pvt. Limited are registered with the department for manufacture of Steel Towers ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....inly, (a) Supply of towers (b) Erection and painting of towers. The appellants have paid excise duty on part 'A' and are discharging service tax on part B under the category of "Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services". The paint is cleared along with the steel tower parts from the factory and the value of the paint is included in the value charged for supply of towers. The appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CCE, Indore 2006 (194) ELT 3 (SC) (b) CCE, Nagpur vs. KEC International Limited 2016 (335) ELT 344 (Tri. Mumbai.) He further contended that since the duty has been collected by the department on the paint cleared from the factory, Cenvat credit on the same cannot be denied. In this regard, he relied upon the following decisions:- (a) PSL Holdings Limited vs. CCE, Rajkot 2003 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s). He relied upon the following case laws with regard to limitation aspect:- (a) CCE, Visakhapatnam vs. Mehta & Co. - 2011 (264) ELT 481 (SC) (b) CCE, Surat vs. Neminath Fabrics Pvt. Limited - 2010 (256) ELT 369 (Guj.) 5. Heard both the parties and examined the record. I find that the order of Commissioner (Appeals) suffers from a serious infirmity. As rightly pointed out by ....