2011 (2) TMI 624 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat credit - Inputs used in the manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted finished goods - Held that - the supplies made by the appellant to SEZ developers were to be treated as deemed exports - If that be so, the provisions of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, requiring the appellant to pay an amount of equal to 10% of the value of exempted final product are not applicable - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Applicability of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on supplies to Special Economic Zones (SEZ).
2. Treatment of supplies to SEZ developers as deemed exports.
3. Validity of demand for payment under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, engaged in furniture manufacturing availing cenvat credit, cleared finished goods to SEZ developers without duty payment. The Revenue contended that Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules requires payment of 10% of exempted final product value if no separate accounts are maintained. The issue revolved around the applicability of this rule to supplies to SEZ developers.

2. The Tribunal referred to precedents like Bhoruka Aluminium Ltd. and CCE Hyderabad v. Vayhan Air Controls P. Ltd., noting the Board's circular treating supplies to SEZ developers as deemed exports. If considered exports, no duty could be demanded. This raised the question of whether the supplies to SEZ developers should indeed be treated as deemed exports, impacting the applicability of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules.

3. A show cause notice demanded payment under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, which was upheld by the adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals). However, the Tribunal, relying on the Board's circular and precedents, held that the supplies to SEZ developers should be treated as deemed exports. Consequently, the requirement to pay 10% of exempted final product value under Rule 6(3) was deemed inapplicable, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and granting relief to the appellant.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad highlights the key issues surrounding the applicability of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules to supplies to SEZ developers, the treatment of such supplies as deemed exports, and the ultimate decision in favor of the appellant based on legal interpretations and precedents.