2021 (4) TMI 604

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.11.2019 on the following substantial question of law:   "Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal has erred in not considering the law laid down by this jurisdictional High Court in the case of CCE vs. ECOF Industries Pvt. Ltd., 2011 (271) ELT 58 (Kar)?" 3. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that, the appellant is engaged in the business of manufacture of construction chemicals. The appellant has factories in Kuluvanahalli, Ankleshwar and Rudrapur. The units of the appellant at Kuluvanahalli and Ankleshwar pay excise duty on the final products manufactured and cleared by the units. In respect of the unit of the appellant at Rudrapur, on t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Adjudicating Authority before the First Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority by order dated 21.02.2013 upheld the demand of input service credit. The appellant thereupon filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by order dated 29.10.2015 has dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in not considering the law laid down by this Court in 'CCE vs. ECOF Industries Pvt. Ltd.,' 2011 (271) ELT 58 (Kar) and the order passed by the Tribunal is cryptic and suffers from vice of non-application of mind. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has supported....