Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Indorama Textiles Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Nagpur on 14 October, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT NO. I Appeal No. E/996/06 (Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 21/2005/C dated 26.12.2005 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur.) Indorama Textiles Ltd Appellant (Represented by: Mr. Jitu Motwani, Advocate) Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Respondent
(Represented by: Mr. Y.K. Agrawal, Additional Commissioner (A.R) ) For approval and signature Honble Mr.S.S. Kang, Vice President Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, Member (Technical)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :Yes CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
CORAM:
Honble Mr.S.S. Kang, Vice President Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing : 14.10.2011 Date of Decision: 14.10.2011 ORDER NO..
Per: S.S. Kang
1. Heard both sides. The appellants filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the benefit of Cenvat Credit in respect of the duty paid on furnace oil which was consumed by job worker for generation of electricity is denied.
2. We find that this issue is already settled by the decision of the Honble Bombay High Court in the appellants own case reported in Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur vs Indorama Textiles Ltd 2010 (260) ELT 382 (Bom), whereby the demand confirmed on the same ground is set aside. It is held that M/s Indorama Textiles Ltd are entitled for credit in respect of the furnace oil used by the job worker. The Revenues appeal against the aforesaid decision has been dismissed by the Honble Supreme Court as reported in Commissioner vs Indorama Textiles Ltd 2010 (260) ELT A 83 (SC). In view of the above decision, which is on the same issue, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
(Dictated in Court.) (Sahab Singh) Member (Technical) (S.S. Kang) Vice President rk 2