2017 (5) TMI 95

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e For the Appellant Mr. N. Jagadish, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per S. S. Garg The present three appeals are directed against the impugned Orders dated 31.1.2014; 28.3.2014 and 23.5.2014 passed by the Commissioner (A) vide which he has upheld the Orders-in-Original. As the issue is identical in all these appeals and therefore they are being disposed of by this common ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....amounts to irregular availment of CENVAT credit. But Assistant Commissioner after considering the reply from the appellant confirmed the demand vide various Orders-in-Original dated 25.09.2012; 31.10.2011; and 28.2.2013. Aggrieved by the said orders, appellant filed appeals before the Commissioner (A). The Commissioner (A) upheld the Orders-in-Original. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final product. In support of his submission, she relied upon the following authorities. (i) CCE vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd.: 2010 (20) S.T.R. 577 (ii) Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE: 2009 (15) S.T.R. 657 3.1 The learned counsel for the appellant further submitted the authorities of KPMG vs. CCE, New Delhi reported in 201....