2017 (6) TMI 966

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ling under Chapter 27 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA) and were availing CENVAT credit on inputs / capital goods and input services under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR, 2004). During the course of the audit of the appellants, it was noticed that the appellants were availing the CENVAT credit of the duty paid on structural items such as plates, channels, angles etc. falling under Chapter 72 of CETA, 1985. As it appeared that the credit availed of Rs. 3,65,516/- on the structural items by the appellant was irregular, a show-cause notice was issued by the Department, proposing to deny the said irregular credit amounting to Rs. 3,65,516/- availed by the appellant. The adjudicating authority, after following the principles of natural j....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in question as the facts of the case are entirely different. In support of his submission, he relied upon the following decisions:- a. India Cements Ltd. Vs. CESTAT, Chennai [2015(321) ELT 209 (Mad.)] b. India Cements Ltd. Vs. CESTAT, Chennai [2014(310) ELT 636 (Mad.)] c. CCE, Tiruchirapalli Vs. India Cements Ltd. [2014(305) ELT 558 (Mad.)] d. India Cements Ltd. Vs. CCE, Trichy [2013(296) ELT 513 (Tri. Chennai)] e CC&CE, Visakhapatnam-II Vs. AP Paper Mills Ltd [2013(291) ELT 585 (Tri. Bang.)] f. CCE, Jaipur Vs. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd [2010(255) ELT 481)] g. UOI Vs. ACC Ltd. [2011 (267) ELT 55 (Chhattisgarh)] h CCE, Jalandhar Vs. Pioneer Agro Extracts Ltd. [2008(230) ELT 597 (P&H)] i. UOI vs. Hindustan Zink Ltd. ....