JUDGMENT

K.S. Jhaveri, J. - By way of this appeal, the department has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the Department.

Counsel for the appellant has framed the following substantial question of law :-

"(i) Whether the Ld. CESTAT was correct in allowing the refund of Cenvat credit of Central Excise duty paid in respect of raw material procured from DTA Units under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 to the assessee and thereby misinterpreting the said provision?"

2. Counsel for the appellant has relied upon the decision of Karnataka High Court in case of Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore vs. ANZ International reported in 2009 (233) E.L.T. 40 (Kar.) which has been confirmed by the Supreme Court wherein it has been held as under :-

"4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of record, it appears that the identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of ANZ International vs. CC, Bangalore -2008 (224) E.L.T. 573 (Tri.-Bang.) which was assailed before the High Court and finally, before the Hon'ble Supreme Court where it was upheld Commissioner vs. ANZ International - 2009 (240) E.L.T. A16 (S.C.) by o