2012 (3) TMI 601 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
The issue involves the demand of Rs. 75,28,050/- confirmed against the applicant/appellant for the period October to December, 2008, regarding supplies made to SEZ developers and the applicability of Rule 6 (3) (b) of Cenvat Credit Rules.

Summary:

Issue 1: Applicability of Rule 6 (3) (b) of Cenvat Credit Rules
The short issue in the appeal is whether supplies made to SEZ developers should be considered as deemed exports under Rule 6 (6) (i) of Cenvat Credit Rules. The provisions were amended w.e.f. 31/12/2008 to include supplies to SEZ developers, but as the period in question is prior to this date, the demands were confirmed against the applicant.

Issue 2: Precedents and Interpretation
The Tribunal referred to the case of Sujako Interiors Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Ahmedabad and M/s Ashirvad Pipes Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Bangalore, where it was held that clearances to SEZ developers are to be treated as deemed exports, not attracting the provisions of Rule 6 (3) (b). The Tribunal also considered whether the amendment made on 31/12/08 should be held as clarificatory and retrospective, as discussed in the case of Sujana Metal Products Ltd. vs. CCE, Hyderabad. The Tribunal found that supplies to SEZ developers are to be equated with exports, supported by the Board's Circular issued on 7/1/2009.

Decision:
Based on the above precedents and interpretations, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and providing consequential relief to the appellant. The Tribunal disposed of the stay petition and appeal accordingly.