COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. AJINKYA ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the CESTAT was justified in holding that the CENVAT credit of duty paid on HR/CR coils availed and utilized by the assessee for paying duty on decoiled HR/CR coils need not be reversed, is the question raised in this appeal. The dispute in the present case relates to the period from 2nd March, 2005 to 31st December, 2005.

(2.) The assessee is engaged in the activity of decoiling of HR/CR coils by cutting and slitting them into specific sizes as per the design given by the buyer and further carried out the activity of pickling and oiling on the decoiled HR/CR coils. The assessee took credit of duty paid on HR/CR coils and utilized the said credit while paying duty on the decoiled HR/CR coils at the time of clearance. It is not in dispute that the duty paid on decoiled HR/CR coils is more than the duty paid on HR/CR coils (the credit of which was taken by the assessee).

(3.) On 4th April, 2006, a show-cause notice was issued to the assessee to the effect that the activity of decoiling the HR/CR coils carried on by the assessee did not constitute manufacture and, hence, the assessee was not entitled to take the credit of duty paid on HR/CR coils. The assessee opposed the claim by filing a detailed reply.