JUDGMENT :

1. The only question of law sought to be urged by the Revenue in this appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is that whether the credit availed of, by the assessee/respondent in the facts of the present case was authorized by law or the rules, especially Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

2. The facts of the present case are that the assessee provided contractual services and job work of manufacturing biscuits and other confectionery items, to M/s. Parle Products Ltd. The mode adopted was that products were manufactured by the assessee, but for and on behalf of M/s. Parle Products Ltd., which cleared the goods under Central Excise Act. The parties had, by mutual agreement, decided that the assessee would also transport the finished products to the premises of M/s. Parle Products Ltd., apart from processing, manufacturing the confectionery and other items, as also packing and other services. The agreement further provided, as follows:-

"Mound Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. would avail Cenvat credit of Central Excise duty paid on the raw and packing materials, capital goods.

Mound Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. would make Excise Invoice/Stock Transfer Notes (STN's)