2018 (6) TMI 1074

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Appellant Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The assessee has filed these appeals being aggrieved by the order of Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The appellant is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and they are engaged in the manufacture of Cement and Clinker falling under the heading 2523 29 10 and 25231000 of the Central Excise Tar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y five thousand eight hundred and forty three only), being the wrongly availed Cenvat credit on capital goods for the period Dec-2010 to Mar-2011 (as per Annexure-A) out of Rs. 74,96,656/- proposed in the show cause notice no. LTUC/5/2012- dt. 4.1.2012, and order of recovery of the same from the taxpayer under Rule 14 of the CCR, 2004 read with Sec. 11A of the CEA, 1944. (b) confirmed an ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct, the adjudicating authority allowed Cenvat Credit on the items falling under Chapter 84, 85 or 90 and for certain goods falling under Chapter 73; but disallowed the same in respect of the goods falling under Chapter 38, 40, 73, 83 and 84 on the ground that these goods used in the erection of CPP ceased to be excisable goods. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant is before this forum. 4. Durin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....resentative, K. Veerabhadra Reddy, per contra, relies on the decisions of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in the cases of Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III; reported in 2014 (35) S.T.R. 865 (Bom.) and Vodafone India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II; reported in 2015 (40) S.T.R. 422 (Bom.) to support the findings of the adjudicating authority. ....