2018 (1) TMI 625

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s - for the appellant. Shri R.K. Mishra, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 29/07/2016 of Commissioner of Central Excise, LTU, New Delhi. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of noodles and wafers liable to Central Excise duty. They have imported certain capital goods and cleared the sam....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that they did receive the capital goods in the financial year 20112012 itself is not disputed. However, awaiting original documents like bill of entry etc. they had refrained from taking any credit during that financial year. However, on receipt of all supporting documents in the next financial year, they have taken full credit. In other words, the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nts are entitled for credit of 50% when the capital goods were received by them in the factory. The duty paid nature of the goods and the eligibility to the Cenvat credit is not in dispute. However, due to certain administrative reasons and non-receipt of original documents, the appellant could not avail the credit of 50% in the same financial year when the capital goods were received by them. Acc....